Prosecution to use Caroline Ellison notes as evidence against SBF

[2stout]

They definitely overextended themselves by taking out too much loans on margin.  The frivolous spending along with bad accounting didn't help either.  More details into how and why it happened and what not to do:  https://neuronwealth.com/5-investing-lessons-from-ftx-fiasco-that-cost-sbf-his-reputation-and-over-2-lakh-crores/

There were certainly a lot of crypto companies in the US that broke laws during the Wild West, but only Sam Bankman-Fried got a 25-year prison sentence because he talked too much. There is no point in commenting on anything here, Wall Street has seen many stories of ruin, but when an inexperienced person starts playing investments, he will always lose.

Typically, but there have been enough situations where the inexperienced has succeeded, and this is also not uncommon.  The inexperienced and experienced usually lose when they get in over their heads, with one example being misallocation and misappropriation of funds.  Another example is playing with house money.  Also, if SBF didn't talk, he was still going to jail- too much paper trail.

[zasad@]

They definitely overextended themselves by taking out too much loans on margin.  The frivolous spending along with bad accounting didn't help either.  More details into how and why it happened and what not to do:  https://neuronwealth.com/5-investing-lessons-from-ftx-fiasco-that-cost-sbf-his-reputation-and-over-2-lakh-crores/

There were certainly a lot of crypto companies in the US that broke laws during the Wild West, but only Sam Bankman-Fried got a 25-year prison sentence because he talked too much. There is no point in commenting on anything here, Wall Street has seen many stories of ruin, but when an inexperienced person starts playing investments, he will always lose.

Typically, but there have been enough situations where the inexperienced has succeeded, and this is also not uncommon.  The inexperienced and experienced usually lose when they get in over their heads, with one example being misallocation and misappropriation of funds.  Another example is playing with house money.  Also, if SBF didn't talk, he was still going to jail- too much paper trail.

I see a certain contradiction in your words.
If a newbie accidentally invested in Anthropic and made a lot of money, then that's luck. "Luck is a bird you cannot hold by its tail." (Russian proverb).
An experienced investor is someone who had experience losing money and now follows risk management rules in their investing.

[2stout]

They definitely overextended themselves by taking out too much loans on margin.  The frivolous spending along with bad accounting didn't help either.  More details into how and why it happened and what not to do:  https://neuronwealth.com/5-investing-lessons-from-ftx-fiasco-that-cost-sbf-his-reputation-and-over-2-lakh-crores/

There were certainly a lot of crypto companies in the US that broke laws during the Wild West, but only Sam Bankman-Fried got a 25-year prison sentence because he talked too much. There is no point in commenting on anything here, Wall Street has seen many stories of ruin, but when an inexperienced person starts playing investments, he will always lose.

Typically, but there have been enough situations where the inexperienced has succeeded, and this is also not uncommon.  The inexperienced and experienced usually lose when they get in over their heads, with one example being misallocation and misappropriation of funds.  Another example is playing with house money.  Also, if SBF didn't talk, he was still going to jail- too much paper trail.

I see a certain contradiction in your words.
If a newbie accidentally invested in Anthropic and made a lot of money, then that's luck. "Luck is a bird you cannot hold by its tail." (Russian proverb).
An experienced investor is someone who had experience losing money and now follows risk management rules in their investing.

There is no certain contradiction in my words, actually there is no contradiction.  A newbie/inexperience can be lucky and/or prepared- research, modeling, risk mitigation and management and be successful, which I mentioned is not uncommon.  Most successful newbies/inexperienced aren't just lucky only.  Also, an experienced investor isn't the only one that follows risk management rules.

[zasad@]

They definitely overextended themselves by taking out too much loans on margin.  The frivolous spending along with bad accounting didn't help either.  More details into how and why it happened and what not to do:  https://neuronwealth.com/5-investing-lessons-from-ftx-fiasco-that-cost-sbf-his-reputation-and-over-2-lakh-crores/

There were certainly a lot of crypto companies in the US that broke laws during the Wild West, but only Sam Bankman-Fried got a 25-year prison sentence because he talked too much. There is no point in commenting on anything here, Wall Street has seen many stories of ruin, but when an inexperienced person starts playing investments, he will always lose.

Typically, but there have been enough situations where the inexperienced has succeeded, and this is also not uncommon.  The inexperienced and experienced usually lose when they get in over their heads, with one example being misallocation and misappropriation of funds.  Another example is playing with house money.  Also, if SBF didn't talk, he was still going to jail- too much paper trail.

I see a certain contradiction in your words.
If a newbie accidentally invested in Anthropic and made a lot of money, then that's luck. "Luck is a bird you cannot hold by its tail." (Russian proverb).
An experienced investor is someone who had experience losing money and now follows risk management rules in their investing.

There is no certain contradiction in my words, actually there is no contradiction.  A newbie/inexperience can be lucky and/or prepared- research, modeling, risk mitigation and management and be successful, which I mentioned is not uncommon.  Most successful newbies/inexperienced aren't just lucky only.  Also, an experienced investor isn't the only one that follows risk management rules.

If an investor masters these tools: "research, modeling, risk mitigation and management", and successfully applies them in practice, he, by definition, ceases to be a classic “newbie/inexperience”. If Sam Bankman-Fried had used these skills, he would not have lost all $26 billion.
A beginner usually takes risks because he doesn't have a lot of capital, but why take risks when you have $26 billion?

[2stout]

They definitely overextended themselves by taking out too much loans on margin.  The frivolous spending along with bad accounting didn't help either.  More details into how and why it happened and what not to do:  https://neuronwealth.com/5-investing-lessons-from-ftx-fiasco-that-cost-sbf-his-reputation-and-over-2-lakh-crores/

There were certainly a lot of crypto companies in the US that broke laws during the Wild West, but only Sam Bankman-Fried got a 25-year prison sentence because he talked too much. There is no point in commenting on anything here, Wall Street has seen many stories of ruin, but when an inexperienced person starts playing investments, he will always lose.

Typically, but there have been enough situations where the inexperienced has succeeded, and this is also not uncommon.  The inexperienced and experienced usually lose when they get in over their heads, with one example being misallocation and misappropriation of funds.  Another example is playing with house money.  Also, if SBF didn't talk, he was still going to jail- too much paper trail.

I see a certain contradiction in your words.
If a newbie accidentally invested in Anthropic and made a lot of money, then that's luck. "Luck is a bird you cannot hold by its tail." (Russian proverb).
An experienced investor is someone who had experience losing money and now follows risk management rules in their investing.

There is no certain contradiction in my words, actually there is no contradiction.  A newbie/inexperience can be lucky and/or prepared- research, modeling, risk mitigation and management and be successful, which I mentioned is not uncommon.  Most successful newbies/inexperienced aren't just lucky only.  Also, an experienced investor isn't the only one that follows risk management rules.

If an investor masters these tools: "research, modeling, risk mitigation and management", and successfully applies them in practice, he, by definition, ceases to be a classic “newbie/inexperience”. If Sam Bankman-Fried had used these skills, he would not have lost all $26 billion.
A beginner usually takes risks because he doesn't have a lot of capital, but why take risks when you have $26 billion?

A "beginner/newbie" may have mastered those tools let's say by university study/education and is able to successfully apply them.  If applied successfully, still a newbie but now has an example of real world experience to build upon.  Perhaps SBF thought that investors would continually pour into him and he would never run out of money- ex, if one spent $1 million a day, it would take 71 years and 295 days, damn near 72 years to spend it all.  And yet, he pissed it away in a few years.

[zasad@]

A "beginner/newbie" may have mastered those tools let's say by university study/education and is able to successfully apply them.  If applied successfully, still a newbie but now has an example of real world experience to build upon.  Perhaps SBF thought that investors would continually pour into him and he would never run out of money- ex, if one spent $1 million a day, it would take 71 years and 295 days, damn near 72 years to spend it all.  And yet, he pissed it away in a few years.

SBF created FTT tokens out of thin air and then used them as collateral. Subsequently, the market value of these tokens plummeted, and his balance turned negative. FTT tokens accounted for 40% of Alameda's assets.
You are confusing asset capitalization with actual cash.
SBF made a fortune in cryptocurrency arbitrage, but he was completely inexperienced in managing a large company and failed to oversee risk management.

[2stout]

A "beginner/newbie" may have mastered those tools let's say by university study/education and is able to successfully apply them.  If applied successfully, still a newbie but now has an example of real world experience to build upon.  Perhaps SBF thought that investors would continually pour into him and he would never run out of money- ex, if one spent $1 million a day, it would take 71 years and 295 days, damn near 72 years to spend it all.  And yet, he pissed it away in a few years.

SBF created FTT tokens out of thin air and then used them as collateral. Subsequently, the market value of these tokens plummeted, and his balance turned negative. FTT tokens accounted for 40% of Alameda's assets.
You are confusing asset capitalization with actual cash.
SBF made a fortune in cryptocurrency arbitrage, but he was completely inexperienced in managing a large company and failed to oversee risk management.

I did not confuse asset capitalization with actual cash.  You said he lost $26 billion, your words- "If Sam Bankman-Fried had used these skills, he would not have lost all $26 billion.  A beginner usually takes risks because he doesn't have a lot of capital, but why take risks when you have $26 billion?"  Based on your words, I provided an example of how long it would take to spend this if spending $1 million a day.

Anyhow, it appears customers are being made "whole", receiving their original account balances as of the November 2022 bankruptcy date, plus interest calculated at a 9%.  The vast majority of customers will receive 119%, but all will miss out on crypto gains since.  It could have been a lot worse.
https://www.investopedia.com/ftx-to-begin-repaying-customers-in-early-2025-what-you-need-to-know-8762380

[zasad@]

A "beginner/newbie" may have mastered those tools let's say by university study/education and is able to successfully apply them.  If applied successfully, still a newbie but now has an example of real world experience to build upon.  Perhaps SBF thought that investors would continually pour into him and he would never run out of money- ex, if one spent $1 million a day, it would take 71 years and 295 days, damn near 72 years to spend it all.  And yet, he pissed it away in a few years.

SBF created FTT tokens out of thin air and then used them as collateral. Subsequently, the market value of these tokens plummeted, and his balance turned negative. FTT tokens accounted for 40% of Alameda's assets.
You are confusing asset capitalization with actual cash.
SBF made a fortune in cryptocurrency arbitrage, but he was completely inexperienced in managing a large company and failed to oversee risk management.

I did not confuse asset capitalization with actual cash.  You said he lost $26 billion, your words- "If Sam Bankman-Fried had used these skills, he would not have lost all $26 billion.  A beginner usually takes risks because he doesn't have a lot of capital, but why take risks when you have $26 billion?"  Based on your words, I provided an example of how long it would take to spend this if spending $1 million a day.

Anyhow, it appears customers are being made "whole", receiving their original account balances as of the November 2022 bankruptcy date, plus interest calculated at a 9%.  The vast majority of customers will receive 119%, but all will miss out on crypto gains since.  It could have been a lot worse.
https://www.investopedia.com/ftx-to-begin-repaying-customers-in-early-2025-what-you-need-to-know-8762380

Let me explain my position to you in more detail.

Sam Bankman-Fried didn't have a risk management department or team at FTX.
https://www.businessinsider.com/sam-bankman-fried-testifies-regrets-not-risk-management-team-ftx-2023-10
"Did you have a risk management team at FTX?" defense attorney Mark Cohen asked his client.
"We sure should have. But no, we didn't," Bankman-Fried replied.   Brilliant:)



Official documents describe how Sam Bankman-Fried abused this.
https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/pr/samuel-bankman-fried-sentenced-25-years-his-orchestration-multiple-fraudulent-schemes

Of course, clients will be reimbursed for their losses, but only those who can navigate the complex bureaucratic procedures. In some cases, it's cheaper to forget about the losses.

__
Don't forget that we think differently, so we will have misunderstandings.

[safar1980]

Senate passes resolution saying Bankman-Fried shouldn’t receive pardon

The Senate unanimously passed a resolution Wednesday declaring that FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried should not receive a pardon.

Bankman-Fried, who was sentenced to 25 years in prison on fraud charges tied to the collapse of his cryptocurrency exchange, officially requested a pardon from the Trump administration in early June.

The resolution, which cleared the upper chamber via unanimous consent, marks a notable rebuke of the disgraced crypto executive. It was put forward by a bipartisan duo involved in negotiations on a crypto regulation bill, Sens. Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.) and Cynthia Lummis (R-Wyo.).

“It should not be considered controversial to say that someone like Sam Bankman-Fried — a fraudster who was convicted by a unanimous jury — should not be allowed to walk away scot-free,” Gallego said in a statement.

“That’s exactly what the Senate affirmed when they passed my resolution,” he continued. “Bankman-Fried stole billions from hardworking Americans. He’s a criminal who deserves to stay locked up.”

[2stout]

A "beginner/newbie" may have mastered those tools let's say by university study/education and is able to successfully apply them.  If applied successfully, still a newbie but now has an example of real world experience to build upon.  Perhaps SBF thought that investors would continually pour into him and he would never run out of money- ex, if one spent $1 million a day, it would take 71 years and 295 days, damn near 72 years to spend it all.  And yet, he pissed it away in a few years.

SBF created FTT tokens out of thin air and then used them as collateral. Subsequently, the market value of these tokens plummeted, and his balance turned negative. FTT tokens accounted for 40% of Alameda's assets.
You are confusing asset capitalization with actual cash.
SBF made a fortune in cryptocurrency arbitrage, but he was completely inexperienced in managing a large company and failed to oversee risk management.

I did not confuse asset capitalization with actual cash.  You said he lost $26 billion, your words- "If Sam Bankman-Fried had used these skills, he would not have lost all $26 billion.  A beginner usually takes risks because he doesn't have a lot of capital, but why take risks when you have $26 billion?"  Based on your words, I provided an example of how long it would take to spend this if spending $1 million a day.

Anyhow, it appears customers are being made "whole", receiving their original account balances as of the November 2022 bankruptcy date, plus interest calculated at a 9%.  The vast majority of customers will receive 119%, but all will miss out on crypto gains since.  It could have been a lot worse.
https://www.investopedia.com/ftx-to-begin-repaying-customers-in-early-2025-what-you-need-to-know-8762380

Let me explain my position to you in more detail.

Sam Bankman-Fried didn't have a risk management department or team at FTX.
https://www.businessinsider.com/sam-bankman-fried-testifies-regrets-not-risk-management-team-ftx-2023-10
"Did you have a risk management team at FTX?" defense attorney Mark Cohen asked his client.
"We sure should have. But no, we didn't," Bankman-Fried replied.   Brilliant:)



Official documents describe how Sam Bankman-Fried abused this.
https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/pr/samuel-bankman-fried-sentenced-25-years-his-orchestration-multiple-fraudulent-schemes

Of course, clients will be reimbursed for their losses, but only those who can navigate the complex bureaucratic procedures. In some cases, it's cheaper to forget about the losses.

__
Don't forget that we think differently, so we will have misunderstandings.

Yes, we think differently but I believe most of our misunderstandings are due to different mother tongues.  I never disagreed with you about SBF not having a risk management department or team and feel it was implied that I agree with this statement.  As far as navigating the complex bureaucratic procedures, I'm curious as to how it compared to the one for Mt. Gox claims- maybe someone who's been through both could chime in.  For those cases where it's cheaper to forget about the losses, I would guess that would be for low claim amounts or for high worth individuals where it's not worth either's time.

[2stout]

Senate passes resolution saying Bankman-Fried shouldn’t receive pardon

The Senate unanimously passed a resolution Wednesday declaring that FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried should not receive a pardon.

Bankman-Fried, who was sentenced to 25 years in prison on fraud charges tied to the collapse of his cryptocurrency exchange, officially requested a pardon from the Trump administration in early June.

The resolution, which cleared the upper chamber via unanimous consent, marks a notable rebuke of the disgraced crypto executive. It was put forward by a bipartisan duo involved in negotiations on a crypto regulation bill, Sens. Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.) and Cynthia Lummis (R-Wyo.).

“It should not be considered controversial to say that someone like Sam Bankman-Fried — a fraudster who was convicted by a unanimous jury — should not be allowed to walk away scot-free,” Gallego said in a statement.

“That’s exactly what the Senate affirmed when they passed my resolution,” he continued. “Bankman-Fried stole billions from hardworking Americans. He’s a criminal who deserves to stay locked up.”

At the end of the day, while a bipartisan proclamation and statement, in essence it's still words as it doesn't have the force of law.  These things used to mean something at one time as they acted as a deterrent or brought shame, but not so much now in recent times.  As SBF victims will be made "whole", he could play this to his favor and still get a pardon if his "buy price" is right.  Time will tell if this resolution has any strength.

[zasad@]

A "beginner/newbie" may have mastered those tools let's say by university study/education and is able to successfully apply them.  If applied successfully, still a newbie but now has an example of real world experience to build upon.  Perhaps SBF thought that investors would continually pour into him and he would never run out of money- ex, if one spent $1 million a day, it would take 71 years and 295 days, damn near 72 years to spend it all.  And yet, he pissed it away in a few years.

SBF created FTT tokens out of thin air and then used them as collateral. Subsequently, the market value of these tokens plummeted, and his balance turned negative. FTT tokens accounted for 40% of Alameda's assets.
You are confusing asset capitalization with actual cash.
SBF made a fortune in cryptocurrency arbitrage, but he was completely inexperienced in managing a large company and failed to oversee risk management.

I did not confuse asset capitalization with actual cash.  You said he lost $26 billion, your words- "If Sam Bankman-Fried had used these skills, he would not have lost all $26 billion.  A beginner usually takes risks because he doesn't have a lot of capital, but why take risks when you have $26 billion?"  Based on your words, I provided an example of how long it would take to spend this if spending $1 million a day.

Anyhow, it appears customers are being made "whole", receiving their original account balances as of the November 2022 bankruptcy date, plus interest calculated at a 9%.  The vast majority of customers will receive 119%, but all will miss out on crypto gains since.  It could have been a lot worse.
https://www.investopedia.com/ftx-to-begin-repaying-customers-in-early-2025-what-you-need-to-know-8762380

Let me explain my position to you in more detail.

Sam Bankman-Fried didn't have a risk management department or team at FTX.
https://www.businessinsider.com/sam-bankman-fried-testifies-regrets-not-risk-management-team-ftx-2023-10
"Did you have a risk management team at FTX?" defense attorney Mark Cohen asked his client.
"We sure should have. But no, we didn't," Bankman-Fried replied.   Brilliant:)



Official documents describe how Sam Bankman-Fried abused this.
https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/pr/samuel-bankman-fried-sentenced-25-years-his-orchestration-multiple-fraudulent-schemes

Of course, clients will be reimbursed for their losses, but only those who can navigate the complex bureaucratic procedures. In some cases, it's cheaper to forget about the losses.

__
Don't forget that we think differently, so we will have misunderstandings.

Yes, we think differently but I believe most of our misunderstandings are due to different mother tongues.  I never disagreed with you about SBF not having a risk management department or team and feel it was implied that I agree with this statement.  As far as navigating the complex bureaucratic procedures, I'm curious as to how it compared to the one for Mt. Gox claims- maybe someone who's been through both could chime in.  For those cases where it's cheaper to forget about the losses, I would guess that would be for low claim amounts or for high worth individuals where it's not worth either's time.

On February 2014, legal proceedings began for Mt. Gox bankruptcy, with the first payouts scheduled to begin in July 2024 and extended to October 2026.
I don't want to write about bureaucratic procedures, but 10 years of waiting is a lot.

___
This Senate resolution is a trolling attack on Trump Trump will most likely not pardon Sam Bankman-Fried now, but he may do so at the end of his presidential term.

[2stout]

A "beginner/newbie" may have mastered those tools let's say by university study/education and is able to successfully apply them.  If applied successfully, still a newbie but now has an example of real world experience to build upon.  Perhaps SBF thought that investors would continually pour into him and he would never run out of money- ex, if one spent $1 million a day, it would take 71 years and 295 days, damn near 72 years to spend it all.  And yet, he pissed it away in a few years.

SBF created FTT tokens out of thin air and then used them as collateral. Subsequently, the market value of these tokens plummeted, and his balance turned negative. FTT tokens accounted for 40% of Alameda's assets.
You are confusing asset capitalization with actual cash.
SBF made a fortune in cryptocurrency arbitrage, but he was completely inexperienced in managing a large company and failed to oversee risk management.

I did not confuse asset capitalization with actual cash.  You said he lost $26 billion, your words- "If Sam Bankman-Fried had used these skills, he would not have lost all $26 billion.  A beginner usually takes risks because he doesn't have a lot of capital, but why take risks when you have $26 billion?"  Based on your words, I provided an example of how long it would take to spend this if spending $1 million a day.

Anyhow, it appears customers are being made "whole", receiving their original account balances as of the November 2022 bankruptcy date, plus interest calculated at a 9%.  The vast majority of customers will receive 119%, but all will miss out on crypto gains since.  It could have been a lot worse.
https://www.investopedia.com/ftx-to-begin-repaying-customers-in-early-2025-what-you-need-to-know-8762380

Let me explain my position to you in more detail.

Sam Bankman-Fried didn't have a risk management department or team at FTX.
https://www.businessinsider.com/sam-bankman-fried-testifies-regrets-not-risk-management-team-ftx-2023-10
"Did you have a risk management team at FTX?" defense attorney Mark Cohen asked his client.
"We sure should have. But no, we didn't," Bankman-Fried replied.   Brilliant:)



Official documents describe how Sam Bankman-Fried abused this.
https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/pr/samuel-bankman-fried-sentenced-25-years-his-orchestration-multiple-fraudulent-schemes

Of course, clients will be reimbursed for their losses, but only those who can navigate the complex bureaucratic procedures. In some cases, it's cheaper to forget about the losses.

__
Don't forget that we think differently, so we will have misunderstandings.

Yes, we think differently but I believe most of our misunderstandings are due to different mother tongues.  I never disagreed with you about SBF not having a risk management department or team and feel it was implied that I agree with this statement.  As far as navigating the complex bureaucratic procedures, I'm curious as to how it compared to the one for Mt. Gox claims- maybe someone who's been through both could chime in.  For those cases where it's cheaper to forget about the losses, I would guess that would be for low claim amounts or for high worth individuals where it's not worth either's time.

On February 2014, legal proceedings began for Mt. Gox bankruptcy, with the first payouts scheduled to begin in July 2024 and extended to October 2026.
I don't want to write about bureaucratic procedures, but 10 years of waiting is a lot.

___
This Senate resolution is a trolling attack on Trump Trump will most likely not pardon Sam Bankman-Fried now, but he may do so at the end of his presidential term.

Agree 10 years is a long time but it doesn't seem this wait will be anywhere as long.  I was just curious at to which is more complex regarding bureaucratic procedures, which is why I suggested that someone who has been through both could chime in.  For all we know, the FTX procedure could be more, the same, or less complex- if really complex at all.

I believe the Senate resolution is more performative rather than substantiative.

[zasad@]

A "beginner/newbie" may have mastered those tools let's say by university study/education and is able to successfully apply them.  If applied successfully, still a newbie but now has an example of real world experience to build upon.  Perhaps SBF thought that investors would continually pour into him and he would never run out of money- ex, if one spent $1 million a day, it would take 71 years and 295 days, damn near 72 years to spend it all.  And yet, he pissed it away in a few years.

SBF created FTT tokens out of thin air and then used them as collateral. Subsequently, the market value of these tokens plummeted, and his balance turned negative. FTT tokens accounted for 40% of Alameda's assets.
You are confusing asset capitalization with actual cash.
SBF made a fortune in cryptocurrency arbitrage, but he was completely inexperienced in managing a large company and failed to oversee risk management.

I did not confuse asset capitalization with actual cash.  You said he lost $26 billion, your words- "If Sam Bankman-Fried had used these skills, he would not have lost all $26 billion.  A beginner usually takes risks because he doesn't have a lot of capital, but why take risks when you have $26 billion?"  Based on your words, I provided an example of how long it would take to spend this if spending $1 million a day.

Anyhow, it appears customers are being made "whole", receiving their original account balances as of the November 2022 bankruptcy date, plus interest calculated at a 9%.  The vast majority of customers will receive 119%, but all will miss out on crypto gains since.  It could have been a lot worse.
https://www.investopedia.com/ftx-to-begin-repaying-customers-in-early-2025-what-you-need-to-know-8762380

Let me explain my position to you in more detail.

Sam Bankman-Fried didn't have a risk management department or team at FTX.
https://www.businessinsider.com/sam-bankman-fried-testifies-regrets-not-risk-management-team-ftx-2023-10
"Did you have a risk management team at FTX?" defense attorney Mark Cohen asked his client.
"We sure should have. But no, we didn't," Bankman-Fried replied.   Brilliant:)



Official documents describe how Sam Bankman-Fried abused this.
https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/pr/samuel-bankman-fried-sentenced-25-years-his-orchestration-multiple-fraudulent-schemes

Of course, clients will be reimbursed for their losses, but only those who can navigate the complex bureaucratic procedures. In some cases, it's cheaper to forget about the losses.

__
Don't forget that we think differently, so we will have misunderstandings.

Yes, we think differently but I believe most of our misunderstandings are due to different mother tongues.  I never disagreed with you about SBF not having a risk management department or team and feel it was implied that I agree with this statement.  As far as navigating the complex bureaucratic procedures, I'm curious as to how it compared to the one for Mt. Gox claims- maybe someone who's been through both could chime in.  For those cases where it's cheaper to forget about the losses, I would guess that would be for low claim amounts or for high worth individuals where it's not worth either's time.

On February 2014, legal proceedings began for Mt. Gox bankruptcy, with the first payouts scheduled to begin in July 2024 and extended to October 2026.
I don't want to write about bureaucratic procedures, but 10 years of waiting is a lot.

___
This Senate resolution is a trolling attack on Trump Trump will most likely not pardon Sam Bankman-Fried now, but he may do so at the end of his presidential term.

Agree 10 years is a long time but it doesn't seem this wait will be anywhere as long.  I was just curious at to which is more complex regarding bureaucratic procedures, which is why I suggested that someone who has been through both could chime in.  For all we know, the FTX procedure could be more, the same, or less complex- if really complex at all.

I believe the Senate resolution is more performative rather than substantiative.

If it were that easy, people wouldn't have to wait so long for their refunds. Unlike Mt. Gox, FTX's payout process is faster, and small payouts are processed faster than large ones.
What's interesting about this situation is that Trump had no plans to pardon Sam Bankman-Fried.
Trump's approval ratings are already falling after the conflict with Iran, so why does he need another scandal with the pardon of Sam Bankman-Fried now?

[2stout]

A "beginner/newbie" may have mastered those tools let's say by university study/education and is able to successfully apply them.  If applied successfully, still a newbie but now has an example of real world experience to build upon.  Perhaps SBF thought that investors would continually pour into him and he would never run out of money- ex, if one spent $1 million a day, it would take 71 years and 295 days, damn near 72 years to spend it all.  And yet, he pissed it away in a few years.

SBF created FTT tokens out of thin air and then used them as collateral. Subsequently, the market value of these tokens plummeted, and his balance turned negative. FTT tokens accounted for 40% of Alameda's assets.
You are confusing asset capitalization with actual cash.
SBF made a fortune in cryptocurrency arbitrage, but he was completely inexperienced in managing a large company and failed to oversee risk management.

I did not confuse asset capitalization with actual cash.  You said he lost $26 billion, your words- "If Sam Bankman-Fried had used these skills, he would not have lost all $26 billion.  A beginner usually takes risks because he doesn't have a lot of capital, but why take risks when you have $26 billion?"  Based on your words, I provided an example of how long it would take to spend this if spending $1 million a day.

Anyhow, it appears customers are being made "whole", receiving their original account balances as of the November 2022 bankruptcy date, plus interest calculated at a 9%.  The vast majority of customers will receive 119%, but all will miss out on crypto gains since.  It could have been a lot worse.
https://www.investopedia.com/ftx-to-begin-repaying-customers-in-early-2025-what-you-need-to-know-8762380

Let me explain my position to you in more detail.

Sam Bankman-Fried didn't have a risk management department or team at FTX.
https://www.businessinsider.com/sam-bankman-fried-testifies-regrets-not-risk-management-team-ftx-2023-10
"Did you have a risk management team at FTX?" defense attorney Mark Cohen asked his client.
"We sure should have. But no, we didn't," Bankman-Fried replied.   Brilliant:)



Official documents describe how Sam Bankman-Fried abused this.
https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/pr/samuel-bankman-fried-sentenced-25-years-his-orchestration-multiple-fraudulent-schemes

Of course, clients will be reimbursed for their losses, but only those who can navigate the complex bureaucratic procedures. In some cases, it's cheaper to forget about the losses.

__
Don't forget that we think differently, so we will have misunderstandings.

Yes, we think differently but I believe most of our misunderstandings are due to different mother tongues.  I never disagreed with you about SBF not having a risk management department or team and feel it was implied that I agree with this statement.  As far as navigating the complex bureaucratic procedures, I'm curious as to how it compared to the one for Mt. Gox claims- maybe someone who's been through both could chime in.  For those cases where it's cheaper to forget about the losses, I would guess that would be for low claim amounts or for high worth individuals where it's not worth either's time.

On February 2014, legal proceedings began for Mt. Gox bankruptcy, with the first payouts scheduled to begin in July 2024 and extended to October 2026.
I don't want to write about bureaucratic procedures, but 10 years of waiting is a lot.

___
This Senate resolution is a trolling attack on Trump Trump will most likely not pardon Sam Bankman-Fried now, but he may do so at the end of his presidential term.

Agree 10 years is a long time but it doesn't seem this wait will be anywhere as long.  I was just curious at to which is more complex regarding bureaucratic procedures, which is why I suggested that someone who has been through both could chime in.  For all we know, the FTX procedure could be more, the same, or less complex- if really complex at all.

I believe the Senate resolution is more performative rather than substantiative.

If it were that easy, people wouldn't have to wait so long for their refunds. Unlike Mt. Gox, FTX's payout process is faster, and small payouts are processed faster than large ones.
What's interesting about this situation is that Trump had no plans to pardon Sam Bankman-Fried.
Trump's approval ratings are already falling after the conflict with Iran, so why does he need another scandal with the pardon of Sam Bankman-Fried now?

That's good the FTX payout process is faster.  With trump's approval rating already in the toilet, I doubt he would proceed with the pardon of SBF now, but later is always an option esp if the opportunity to grift is better then.  Who knows, he could also use the pardon now or later as a diversionary tactic to pull attention away from something else, such as the war.

[zasad@]

That's good the FTX payout process is faster.  With trump's approval rating already in the toilet, I doubt he would proceed with the pardon of SBF now, but later is always an option esp if the opportunity to grift is better then.  Who knows, he could also use the pardon now or later as a diversionary tactic to pull attention away from something else, such as the war.

I sometimes read American public opinion polls, and they say that Americans don't care who Trump is bombing, as long as it's far away. Americans are more concerned about gas prices at the pump, which have been rising lately. Americans care about social policy and affordable healthcare, and the fate of the SBF is of least interest to them, and many probably don't even know who it is.

[2stout]

That's good the FTX payout process is faster.  With trump's approval rating already in the toilet, I doubt he would proceed with the pardon of SBF now, but later is always an option esp if the opportunity to grift is better then.  Who knows, he could also use the pardon now or later as a diversionary tactic to pull attention away from something else, such as the war.

I sometimes read American public opinion polls, and they say that Americans don't care who Trump is bombing, as long as it's far away. Americans are more concerned about gas prices at the pump, which have been rising lately. Americans care about social policy and affordable healthcare, and the fate of the SBF is of least interest to them, and many probably don't even know who it is.

I'm sure the Senate resolution has made many more aware of who SBF is if they didn't know already as it was all over the news.  This can provide an opportunity for manufactured distraction.

There may be a lot of Americans that don't care who Trump is bombing, but there are more Americans that do care.  As long as it's far away may be ok for some until the chickens come home to roost, meaning ok until it hits home- either happening on American soil or if a loved one in the service is far away and is either maimed or brought back in a body bag, then all of a sudden there is care by those who didn't previously care.

Also, there is a lot of performative outrage over gas prices at the pump, social policy, and affordable care depending on who is in office and esp during election cycles.  The midterms should give a better picture on what Americans really care about.

[zasad@]

That's good the FTX payout process is faster.  With trump's approval rating already in the toilet, I doubt he would proceed with the pardon of SBF now, but later is always an option esp if the opportunity to grift is better then.  Who knows, he could also use the pardon now or later as a diversionary tactic to pull attention away from something else, such as the war.

I sometimes read American public opinion polls, and they say that Americans don't care who Trump is bombing, as long as it's far away. Americans are more concerned about gas prices at the pump, which have been rising lately. Americans care about social policy and affordable healthcare, and the fate of the SBF is of least interest to them, and many probably don't even know who it is.

I'm sure the Senate resolution has made many more aware of who SBF is if they didn't know already as it was all over the news.  This can provide an opportunity for manufactured distraction.

There may be a lot of Americans that don't care who Trump is bombing, but there are more Americans that do care.  As long as it's far away may be ok for some until the chickens come home to roost, meaning ok until it hits home- either happening on American soil or if a loved one in the service is far away and is either maimed or brought back in a body bag, then all of a sudden there is care by those who didn't previously care.

Also, there is a lot of performative outrage over gas prices at the pump, social policy, and affordable care depending on who is in office and esp during election cycles.  The midterms should give a better picture on what Americans really care about.

What surprises me most about this SBF situation is that the Senate's official policy "emphasizes the unity of government in the fight against cryptocrime and that such crimes do not go unpunished" (I compiled these excerpts from official resolutions).

But of all the crypto criminals, SBF is the only one serving such a long sentence, while all the others have long since left prison.

[2stout]

That's good the FTX payout process is faster.  With trump's approval rating already in the toilet, I doubt he would proceed with the pardon of SBF now, but later is always an option esp if the opportunity to grift is better then.  Who knows, he could also use the pardon now or later as a diversionary tactic to pull attention away from something else, such as the war.

I sometimes read American public opinion polls, and they say that Americans don't care who Trump is bombing, as long as it's far away. Americans are more concerned about gas prices at the pump, which have been rising lately. Americans care about social policy and affordable healthcare, and the fate of the SBF is of least interest to them, and many probably don't even know who it is.

I'm sure the Senate resolution has made many more aware of who SBF is if they didn't know already as it was all over the news.  This can provide an opportunity for manufactured distraction.

There may be a lot of Americans that don't care who Trump is bombing, but there are more Americans that do care.  As long as it's far away may be ok for some until the chickens come home to roost, meaning ok until it hits home- either happening on American soil or if a loved one in the service is far away and is either maimed or brought back in a body bag, then all of a sudden there is care by those who didn't previously care.

Also, there is a lot of performative outrage over gas prices at the pump, social policy, and affordable care depending on who is in office and esp during election cycles.  The midterms should give a better picture on what Americans really care about.

What surprises me most about this SBF situation is that the Senate's official policy "emphasizes the unity of government in the fight against cryptocrime and that such crimes do not go unpunished" (I compiled these excerpts from official resolutions).

But of all the crypto criminals, SBF is the only one serving such a long sentence, while all the others have long since left prison.

At the least, Faruk Faith Ozer and Remy Ra St Felix received longer sentence @ 11,196 years and 47 years respectively.  Do Kwon got 15 years, while not at long as SBF's 25 years, 15 years is still long.  I'm not saying SBF didn't deserve time, but it is a real head scratcher the amount of time he got when you consider some of these criminals either made folks partially or never whole- some won't even see a dime, while SBF is on track to make folks "fully whole".

[zasad@]

That's good the FTX payout process is faster.  With trump's approval rating already in the toilet, I doubt he would proceed with the pardon of SBF now, but later is always an option esp if the opportunity to grift is better then.  Who knows, he could also use the pardon now or later as a diversionary tactic to pull attention away from something else, such as the war.

I sometimes read American public opinion polls, and they say that Americans don't care who Trump is bombing, as long as it's far away. Americans are more concerned about gas prices at the pump, which have been rising lately. Americans care about social policy and affordable healthcare, and the fate of the SBF is of least interest to them, and many probably don't even know who it is.

I'm sure the Senate resolution has made many more aware of who SBF is if they didn't know already as it was all over the news.  This can provide an opportunity for manufactured distraction.

There may be a lot of Americans that don't care who Trump is bombing, but there are more Americans that do care.  As long as it's far away may be ok for some until the chickens come home to roost, meaning ok until it hits home- either happening on American soil or if a loved one in the service is far away and is either maimed or brought back in a body bag, then all of a sudden there is care by those who didn't previously care.

Also, there is a lot of performative outrage over gas prices at the pump, social policy, and affordable care depending on who is in office and esp during election cycles.  The midterms should give a better picture on what Americans really care about.

What surprises me most about this SBF situation is that the Senate's official policy "emphasizes the unity of government in the fight against cryptocrime and that such crimes do not go unpunished" (I compiled these excerpts from official resolutions).

But of all the crypto criminals, SBF is the only one serving such a long sentence, while all the others have long since left prison.

At the least, Faruk Faith Ozer and Remy Ra St Felix received longer sentence @ 11,196 years and 47 years respectively.  Do Kwon got 15 years, while not at long as SBF's 25 years, 15 years is still long.  I'm not saying SBF didn't deserve time, but it is a real head scratcher the amount of time he got when you consider some of these criminals either made folks partially or never whole- some won't even see a dime, while SBF is on track to make folks "fully whole".

Faruk Fatih Özer was convicted in Istanbul, Remy Ra St. Felix was convicted in the US, but he was a bandit who robbed people.
The only story that's close and similar to the SBF is Do Kwon's.
SBF and Do Kwon are two scapegoats who received long sentences in the US. Why didn't the Senate resolution cover Do Kwon?