siftrics

21 ms·

211.
by siftrics 4y ago
Which set of supposed regulators approved this purchase? Find them. Investigate them.
212.
by siftrics 4y ago
Source? Why would SBF delete his tweet claiming funds are "never invested, not even in bonds"? Lending money and buying bonds are functionally the same thing, albeit there is legal nuance. What is a "protocol CEX"? I&#x2
213.
by siftrics 4y ago
As if that morally exonerates him...
214.
by siftrics 4y ago
Yes. It did have huge initial capital investments. In fact, in one of the rounds, $420m was raised and SBF personally took $300m for himself. He just funneled it to his own entities. I'm sure investors wouldn't be happy. I would n
215.
by siftrics 4y ago
https://twitter.com/wclementeiii/status/1592289824542949376 That is hard evidence that Alameda took FTX customers' deposits. It is easy to find the original FTX Terms of Service which state that deposits are
216.
by siftrics 4y ago
It is well documented that he directly stole depositor's funds.
217.
by siftrics 4y ago
Yes, but he gambled depositors' money. He defrauded his customers. He stole their deposits. He stated he would not take their deposits, yet he did. He committed fraud. He committed wire fraud. He stole.
218.
by siftrics 4y ago
It is well-documented that SBF literally stole customer deposits and lent them to Alameda. He defrauded his customers, investors and employees. He stole.
219.
by siftrics 4y ago
Well, you're wrong. Let's come back to this in 10-20 years and see who's right.
220.
by siftrics 4y ago
Remind me in 10 years.
221.
by siftrics 4y ago
Well what is your rebuttal?
222.
by siftrics 4y ago
Truly decentralized exchanges exist and clear tens of billions of dollars in volume every single day.
223.
by siftrics 4y ago
Sure, but is the not a step in the right direction?
224.
by siftrics 4y ago
Moving large amounts of money IS basic financial services. Would you argue Jews should leave all their money behind in Nazi Germany when fleeing? By your logic, Nazi Germany should have the right to inspect and disallow the transfer. Just b
225.
by siftrics 4y ago
False. It doesn't require smart phones. False. It doesn't require always-on internet. False. It doesn't require offline currency exchanges. Try fleeing Brazil or Russia with significant amounts of cash. Either you cannot do i
226.
by siftrics 4y ago
It would be impossible for any entity to fraudulently post proof of on-chain reserves today. Sure, the fraud might fool some subset of extremely uninformed people initially, but someone is bound to find the fraud when they check the chain w
227.
by siftrics 4y ago
Because in many countries throughout the world it is illegal to save and spend US dollars. Or you can do it, but suffer extortionist fees. Classic first-worlder, thinking corrupt, authoritarian regimes which arbitrarily seize assets and cut
228.
by siftrics 4y ago
USDC, USDH, DAI, the list goes on
229.
by siftrics 4y ago
Yes, Terra had quite insane ponzinomics. But that is a poor argument against what stablecoins could be. Why are you arguing against letting anyone with an internet connection save US dollars? Should only US citizens be allowed to save US do
230.
by siftrics 4y ago
What is your point? My point is anyone with an internet connection can give their savings 100% exposure to any centralized fiat currency, _if they so choose._ I'm not saying you should or you have to. I'm just saying this gives pe
231.
by siftrics 4y ago
> If this system wasn't making money for the people developing it, they wouldn't care at all about 'unbanked' people. No, THAT seems disingenuous. I am working on crypto because I want to help these oppressed, unlucky
232.
by siftrics 4y ago
First, the greater community that would "accept" such an audit that is simply proof of on-chain funds is not dumb enough to download some random "Bitcoin wallet" that shows fake numbers for one single company. Second, th
233.
by siftrics 4y ago
Unbelievable ignorance. We just witnessed one of the largest frauds in all of human history. It would have been nearly impossible to trick every client that exists that can examine the chain. You are so wrong it is unfathomable that you are
234.
by siftrics 4y ago
"The oppressor has the upper hand so we shouldn't try to help the oppressed!" It's about giving people slightly better odds of escaping abuse. It's about helping humanity.
235.
by siftrics 4y ago
You're acting in bad faith and you know it. This clearly reduces trust dramatically.
236.
by siftrics 4y ago
You can easily audit total assets though. Just look at one number on the chain.
237.
by siftrics 4y ago
Not if your country is under tyrannical or authoritarian rule and disallows access to basic financial services for some arbitrary reason.
238.
by siftrics 4y ago
Stablecoins pegged to the dollar and various other currencies of the "real world" have existed for many years now. Stop acting in bad faith.
239.
by siftrics 4y ago
Yes, absolutely. In a fully public voting ledger, you could manually verify each vote is associated to a unique national identifier without revealing it. E.g., this vote corresponds to an SSN that hasn't cast any other vote, without re
240.
by siftrics 4y ago
> But what if your private keys are actually owned by Alameda, who lent you them for the purpose of demonstrating solvency but then oops options blew up and they're gone now? You don't understand public key cryptography. If som

More ›