News BITCOIN, Heists, Thefts, Hacks, Scams, and Losses

[Astronuc]

FTX bankruptcy documents show list of investors set to be completely wiped out, including Tom Brady and Robert Kraft

https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/ftx-bankruptcy-documents-show-list-170209957.html

As part of its bankruptcy process, FTX Monday released a list of its top equity holders, detailing just how many investors were set to be wiped out from the downfall of the crypto exchange.The document showed Brady, who was a brand ambassador for FTX and appeared in a commercial for the company, owned just over 1.1 million common shares of FTX. Meanwhile, Bündchen, Brady's ex-wife, owns just under 700,000 common shares of FTX.

The billionaire Robert Kraft, who owns the New England Patriots NFL team, was also listed in the FTX bankruptcy document. Through KPC Venture Capital, Kraft owns over 110,000 Series B preferred shares of FTX Trading, as well as 479,000 common shares and about 44,000 Series A preferred shares of West Realm Shires, the company that controls FTX's US exchange.

. . . .

Well-known funds run by Tiger Global, Thoma Bravo, Sequoia Capital, SkyBridge, and Third Point, among others, were listed as owning millions of both common and preferred shares of FTX.

Those investments are now virtually worthless, . . .

So much for being a safe investment.

 

[morrobay]

Some of these losses in the bankruptcy filings are based on valuations just before the crash. And that's not the same as the initial investment. Searched for Tom Brady's initial investment but cannot find it. For example if an initial investment was x not sure they can claim a loss of 10x.

 

[BWV]

But if Tom Brady received shares last year as part of compensation for being a spokesperson the full amount would be taxable just like his salary, and that would set his tax basis in the shares for calculating gains or losses if he later sold them. So he had to fork over cash equal to 37% of the value in Federal Taxes and now has worthless shares that he can only deduct against other long term capital gains(assuming he received the shares over a year ago)

 

[Astronuc]

Bankrupt cryptocurrency exchange FTX said it has located more than $5 billion in cash and other liquid assets and is hoping to sell hundreds of additional holdings with a book value of more than $4.6 billion.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/com...n-5-billion-in-cash-liquid-assets/ar-AA16dYJB

Those assets are valued as of FTX’s bankruptcy filing in November and don’t include $425 million held by authorities in the Bahamas, company lawyers said on Wednesday in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Wilmington, Del.

FTX lawyers also told the judge overseeing the bankruptcy case that the amount of the shortfall in FTX customer funds isn’t yet clear. The company is working on determining the size of the claims pool and potential recoveries for some 9 million customer accounts it has identified, FTX lawyer Andrew Dietderich said in the court hearing.
. . .

 

[artis]

Does anyone remember the Onecoin scam and it's leaders Sebastian Greenwood and Ruja Ignatjeva?
Apparently Ruja is still out there hiding and evading her capture with some of the money she got from all this, but her counterpart Sebastian just plead guilty to the crimes incriminated against him

https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/p...currency-pyramid-scheme-onecoin-pleads-guilty

The sad truth is that there were many smaller guys who were the local marketers of this scam who although they got far far less money out of it are free and no one will charge them with anything , but they knew exactly what sort of BS they were selling and all for their personal gain.

Either way for some weird reason onecoin youtube channel is still up and so is Sebastian's if you have free time you can check those con's out just to remind yourself how sleezy criminals look like.

 

[artis]

PS. I wrote her last name incorrectly , it's Ruja Ignatova
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruja_Ignatova

 

[BWV]

 

[fluidistic]

Unconventional, but still relevant post:
The CEO of Binance saying Harmony's One hacker(s) tried to cash out from Binance (and then Huobi), they apparently retrieve 124 BTC out of the hacker. Very low level of sophistication from the hacker's part.

 

[Astronuc]

Crypto lender Genesis Global Capital filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in New York early Friday morning, marking the latest business in the industry to file for bankruptcy as the fallout from last year's collapse in crypto prices continues to ripple through markets.

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/crypto-lender-genesis-files-for-bankruptcy-protection-125411795.html

https://www.reuters.com/technology/crypto-lending-unit-genesis-files-us-bankruptcy-2023-01-20/

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/01/20/cry...tcy-barry-silbert-digital-currency-group.html

The company listed over 100,000 creditors in a “mega” bankruptcy filing, with aggregate liabilities ranging from $1.2 billion to $11 billion dollars, according to bankruptcy documents.

 

[morrobay]

The overview seems to be artificially inflating the value of a funds crypto coins through market manipulation, ie have a connected fund buy the very limited amount (10%) that is on open market. Then use the 90% that is in off market holdings as collateral for loans. Even though it would be difficult to sell that 90% for cash. https://dnyuz.com/2023/01/18/ftx-founder-gamed-markets-crypto-rivals-say/

 

[Astronuc]

Reuters reports Feds seized nearly $700 million from FTX founder Bankman-Fried
https://www.reuters.com/technology/...million-ftx-founder-bankman-fried-2023-01-21/

Jan 20 (Reuters) - Federal prosecutors have seized nearly $700 million in assets from FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried in January, largely in the form of Robinhood stock, according to a Friday court filing.

Bankman-Fried, who has been accused of stealing billions of dollars from FTX customers to pay debts incurred by his crypto-focused hedge fund, has pleaded not guilty to fraud charges. He is scheduled to face trial in October.

. . .
The ownership of the seized Robinhood shares, valued at about $525 million, has been the subject of disputes between Bankman-Fried, FTX, and bankrupt crypto lender BlockFi.

The most recent asset seizure reported by the DOJ took place on Thursday, when prosecutors seized $94.5 million in cash from an account at Silvergate Bank which was associated with FTX Digital Markets, FTX's subsidiary in the Bahamas. The DOJ seized more than $7 million from other Silvergate accounts associated with Bankman-Fried and FTX.

It would seem cryptocurrency is only of value if it can ultimately be exchanged for actual government-issued currency, or some tangible asset such as real estate, equity in a business, or some other physical asset that represents value in government-issued currency.

 

[phinds]

It would seem cryptocurrency is only of value if it can ultimately be exchanged for actual government-issued currency, or some tangible asset ...

Well, yeah, but it's actually also true that government issued currency is also only of value if it can ultimately be exchanged for a tangible asset. It CAN of course, because that's the system we use but it has no more intrinsic value than does cryptocurrency. It is protected by the "full faith and credit" of issuing governments which crypto is not and THAT is the big difference, not the intrinsic value, which neither one has.

 

[artis]

Well, yeah, but it's actually also true that government issued currency is also only of value if it can ultimately be exchanged for a tangible asset. It CAN of course, because that's the system we use but it has no more intrinsic value than does cryptocurrency. It is protected by the "full faith and credit" of issuing governments which crypto is not and THAT is the big difference, not the intrinsic value, which neither one has.

Exactly, if I am left on a deserted island then any currency is of no value , and dollars too are just green little papers one can wipe his behind with.
What has value then is food and resources to build stuff, but then again in the ordinary world food and resources also have pretty much the same value so in other words the only real value is in "stuff".
So one could say dollars are just a better "means to an end" if compared to crypto and that's it.

One doesn't have to look far to see that every dirty oligarch who has some smarts always tries to pour his dirty dollars into everything from real estate to yachts to gold bars to expensive jewelry etc.
Gemstones and expensive items are somewhat easier to conceal and more practical than money I think especially crypto given how it has lost it;s value just recently

 

[fluidistic]

Well, yeah, but it's actually also true that government issued currency is also only of value if it can ultimately be exchanged for a tangible asset. It CAN of course, because that's the system we use but it has no more intrinsic value than does cryptocurrency. It is protected by the "full faith and credit" of issuing governments which crypto is not and THAT is the big difference, not the intrinsic value, which neither one has.

Crypto is ''protected'' by cryptography and a rather complex system involving blockchain, which governements aren't. I can see pros and cons for both sides.

 

[phinds]

Crypto is ''protected'' by cryptography ...

What does that even mean in terms of its value?

 

[nsaspook]

Crypto is ''protected'' by cryptography and a rather complex system involving blockchain, which governements aren't. I can see pros and cons for both sides.

As we've seen so many times that crypto protection and blockchain are as effective as a wet tissue in protecting the actual value of some random crapcoin. IMO a cultist like Faith in Bitcoin keeps Bitcoin from crashing. A stable governments "full faith and credit" with the added ability to officially punish those that forge/devalue government currency and/or cheat is much more of a pro than crypto.

 

[artis]

typical digital money transactions are also protected by various methods depending on the institution doing them, I too can't see why would that make the value of the money higher or lower

 

[BWV]

There is no such thing as intrinsic value - water is worth nothing to me today as it flows free from the tap, but with 6 of us on a lifeboat at sea…

Value comes from marginal utility

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marginalism

As mentioned above, money gets its value from the credit of the issuer, which is why USD is worthy more than Venezuelan Bolivars

 

[fluidistic]

What does that even mean in terms of its value?

It means that as long as we're unable to exploit a potential flaw in how they (the cryptos) work, they have a value in that they can be used to prove ownership of addresses on a blockchain.

 

[phinds]

It means that as long as we're unable to exploit a potential flaw in how they (the cryptos) work, they have a value in that they can be used to prove ownership of addresses on a blockchain.

What does that have to do with their VALUE? I can own a bucket of mud but that doesn't make it valuable.

 

[fluidistic]

What does that have to do with their VALUE? I can own a bucket of mud but that doesn't make it valuable.

Imagine a Wikipedia in which every article is a bank account statement, anyone can access to any page. However, people can only edit specific articles, their own "bank accounts", thanks to cryptography. When you buy a good or do a trade with someone else, both articles get updated with a new line indicating the transaction.
Elon Musk + Bill Gates +whoever else you can imagine, won't be able to update your article(s) and take control of it. A possible hacker or group of states, might, however, especially over decades or hundreds or years (or possibly more). In this regard, it is a gamble.

People value the fact that they have control over their own article, they can prove to the world of what they own, and they can do trades with such a system.

 

[russ_watters]

People value the fact that they have control over their own article, they can prove to the world of what they own, and they can do trades with such a system.

Not many, apparently. And based on the volatility there doesn't seem to be much agreement about what that value should be.

The thing is, most new, groundbreaking technologies are obviously useful. This one isn't. Indeed, I'm pretty sure I don't want those things. They don't sound like useful features to me.

My Visa card, on the other hand, is very useful.... but I'm not buying and selling visa bucks for the privilege of using it. That would be weird.

 

[russ_watters]

Anyway, the stock market and crypto are up this month.

 

[fluidistic]

Not many, apparently. And based on the volatility there doesn't seem to be much agreement about what that value should be.

The thing is, most new, groundbreaking technologies are obviously useful. This one isn't. Indeed, I'm pretty sure I don't want those things. They don't sound like useful features to me.

My Visa card, on the other hand, is very useful.... but I'm not buying and selling visa bucks for the privilege of using it. That would be weird.

A couple million people "only". Yes, the volatility is extremely high, although it used to be much higher in the past.
I agree that cryptocurrencies are very limited in their current usecase, I cannot buy a piece of bread with them, although it would work without issue (I don't mean Bitcoin, but others). Adoption is extremely low, there is a lot of room for improvement in that aspect.

If you were paid in cryptos, the visa story would be different. Adoption is so low that it's currently a hassle to deal with cryptos vs visa. But if common stores, and a new Amazon-like website would pop up, one that accepts several kinds of cryptos, things would be quite different.

By the way, I am not a Bitcoin maximalist, or a crypto advocate. I am not like /r/Buttcoin people either. But I do think that cryptos offer an interesting alternative to the current monetary system. I haven't been convinced by logical arguments that they are worthless.

 

[artis]

I haven't been convinced by logical arguments that they are worthless.

Well they aren't worthless but then again who likes a currency that fluctuates that much.
A currency needs to be made stable by something and that something can't be the currency itself. That would be like claiming your a "good person" and then providing your own comment about yourself also as the proof for that.

As safe as blockchain is , USD safety in most banks is also rather high so I don't see that as a problem. When was the last time anyone participating in this thread got robbed in their bank account? I think never would be the correct answer with 99% probability.

I guess as long as bitcoin isn't accepted in the mainstream and used by some 50+ % of population it is safe to say it will remain an outsider. Trust is hard to earn especially if peoples livelihoods are at stake. And given the latest events like SBF etc that sure hasn't helped to gain trust.
Most people don't go into detail they just hear that some scumbags have run with billions of dollars in their crypto pyramid schemes and they are turned off and rightly so.
If a product or a certain market can be that exploited from all kinds of lowlife crooks then why would honest folks want to participate even if the system itself has nothing to do with it?
This then begins the topic of "regulation" and oversight but I won't go into it, theres plenty of discussion about it already.@russ_watters VISA on the other hand is much more safe because it's established technology that works and has plenty of oversight so to speak, sure I can't see a reason why he should abandon it and many think the same it seems

 

[artis]

Just read on CNN an interesting story about the One Coin scam author and also missing FBI top 10 fugitive Ruja Ignatova.
Bit of a trip down recent memory lane, interesting read

https://edition.cnn.com/2023/01/22/business/ruja-ignatova-cryptoqueen-fbi-most-wanted-cec/index.html

 

[Vanadium 50]

who likes a currency that fluctuates that much.

Historically, Zimbabwe. Brazil. Argentina. Weimar Germany. Venezuela.

In cryptios case, people who plan to exchange fiat currency for crypto now, and exchange it back when it's worth more. They don't want stability.

I guess as long as bitcoin isn't accepted in the mainstream and used by some 50+ % of population it is safe to say it will remain an outsider.

"Election close in battleground states"

This is true, but it's true by construction.

 

[russ_watters]

Historically, Zimbabwe. Brazil. Argentina. Weimar Germany. Venezuela.

I don't think that's true. I think you answered the wrong question/have it backwards: They had instability, but I don't think they wanted it.

In cryptios case, people who plan to exchange fiat currency for crypto now, and exchange it back when it's worth more. They don't want stability.

So...not a currency, but and appreciating asset. The book I keep recommending, "The Only Investment Guide You'll Ever Need", tells a story from the '80s of people converting their dollars to Mexican Pesos and holding them in Mexican banks due to the higher interest rate of the banks and pegging of the Peso to the dollar. Not exactly the same thing but close....well....close to what the more dubious exchanges are promising. Anyway, that worked great until dollar peg was removed.

Crypto might, however, appeal to those in 3rd world countries at risk of hyperinflation. But it isn't clear to me why they couldn't just store their money as dollars.

 

[russ_watters]

If you were paid in cryptos, the visa story would be different. Adoption is so low that it's currently a hassle to deal with cryptos vs visa. But if common stores, and a new Amazon-like website would pop up, one that accepts several kinds of cryptos, things would be quite different....

I haven't been convinced by logical arguments that they are worthless.

Certainly, I use dollars because I have to, and if I had to use bitcoin I'd use bitcoin. But that doesn't provide a path or reason to get from point A to point B. It's a cart before the horse argument. Steve Jobs didn't sell a lot of iPhones by asking people "why not?" and saying they should prove it to him, he sold them by showing him why they should.

The features claimed aren't ones most people want, they are counter-culture political arguments that in the real world are not good features:

• Nobody else really wants their bank statements to be public.
• Nobody else wants to keep their money under a literal mattress. They want banks.

I had a co-worker in 2009 who was literally burying gold and ammunition in his back yard (doesn't telling people defeat the purpose?). He's no longer with the company, but I'm sure that guy owns and believes in crypto, and if I wanted to steal it from him I could just look under his mattress for the flash drive.

A thing doesn't need a reason to be proven worthless it needs a reason to be proven to have value. People forgetting that is how you get $10,000 Beanie Babies.

Anyway, I was googling adoption/use rates, and there isn't much out there, but I did find that Bitcoin currently does about 300,000 transactions a day. Visa does 150 million (not including the back-side) and unlike Bitcoin where we know most transactions are not for commerce, we know all of Visa's are. iPhones were 18% of the global cell phone market share (where they currently remain) in 5 years.

 

[Vanadium 50]

They had instability, but I don't think they wanted it.

I see your point, but they "wanted" it in the sense that they made decisions known to lead to it, to avoid making other more difficult decisions. Like governmental financial responsibility. ("That's just crazy talk!")

As for BTC and its ilk being a currency, it is in the sense that one can use it to buy things unavailable elsewhere, like illegal drugs, and having one's mother-in-law whacked. And people are shocked, shocked, to finding out there is fraud, theft and other criminal activity going on.

 

[russ_watters]

I see your point, but they "wanted" it in the sense that they made decisions known to lead to it, to avoid making other more difficult decisions. Like governmental financial responsibility. ("That's just crazy talk!")

The governments, yes. This is an argument for why the people might want crypto. Of course, these are people rebelling against the government. Cryptobros make that argument about why we shouldn't trust fiat in general, but it only really could apply to unstable countries. Is that enough? I think it's unlikely, and that may hurt a lot of people in those 3rd world countries.

As for BTC and its ilk being a currency, it is in the sense that one can use it to buy things unavailable elsewhere, like illegal drugs, and having one's mother-in-law whacked. And people are shocked, shocked, to finding out there is fraud, theft and other criminal activity going on.

Yup, counterculture-ers always believe they are morally righteous, even when they're stealing long distance phone service (Jobs) or buying drugs.

 

[artis]

Nobody else really wants their bank statements to be public.

This is a really good point.
It's enough that the IRS equivalent in my country and the government scans my purchases for potential fraud once the sums get larger, I wouldn't want some guy across the street with a youtube channel to do the same.

I had a co-worker in 2009 who was literally burying gold and ammunition in his back yard

Reminds me of those that build their own "backyard bunkers" , hasn't anyone told them that the modern day nuclear war would be so devastating that such bunkers and basements full of stuff make almost no difference.
Or maybe that was for a less global event like a civil war against the US government?

 

[Vanadium 50]

Cryptobros make that argument about why we shouldn't trust fiat in genera

By example!

 

[Astronuc]

Bankrupt crypto lender BlockFi accidentally reveals it had over $1.2 billion in assets tied up with FTX
https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/bankrupt-crypto-lender-blockfi-accidentally-111733176.html

The redacted sections include "trade secret(s) or confidential research, development, or commercial information," one of the filings show.

The findings show BlockFi's exposure to Sam Bankman-Fried's collapsed crypto empire was greater than previous disclosures had indicated.

As of January 14, unredacted filings show BlockFi had $415.9 million worth of assets linked to FTX and $831.3 million tied to Alameda. However, lawyers representing BlockFi previously said the firm had $355 million in digital assets stuck on FTX, and loaned $671 million to Alameda.

Meanwhile on Coindesk - Bloomberg reports Binance Mistakenly Mixed Crypto Exchange's Customer Funds With B-Token Collateral
https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/binance-mistakenly-mixed-crypto-exchanges-125822255.html

Binance, the world’s largest crypto exchange by trading volume, mistakenly kept collateral for some of the crypto assets it issues in the same wallet as funds belonging to its customers, Bloomberg reported Tuesday, citing an unidentified Binance spokesperson.

The exchange issued 94 so-called Binance-peg tokens (B-Tokens), and reserves for almost half of those are stored in a cold wallet called Binance 8, Bloomberg said. The wallet contains more tokens than required for the number of B-Tokens issued. Since the tokens are supposed to be backed 1:1, the excess indicates the collateral is being mixed with customers’ tokens, according to Bloomberg.

So customers' dubious assets get replaced by even more dubious (volatile) assets.

 

[Vanadium 50]

accidentally reveals

Accidentally? Or is he laying the groundwork for the defense "nobody this dumb could pull off a swift caper like this."

 

[Astronuc]

Hackers stole $3.8 billion from crypto investors in 2022, a 13% increase from 2021 and marking a new all time high for annual theft of digital coins.

This rise in crypto hacks is just the latest indicator to underscore how security within the digital asset market, especially Decentralized Finance (DeFi), remains a major obstacle for the industry.

According to a new report by blockchain forensics firm Chainalysis, DeFi protocols accounted for $3.1 billion, or 82%, of all crypto stolen by hackers, up 9% from 2021.

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/hack...-from-crypto-investors-in-2022-132405068.html

"Bridges are an attractive target for hackers because the smart contracts in effect become huge, centralized repositories of funds backing the assets that have been bridged to the new chain," Chainalysis said in its report.

Notable cross-chain bridge hacks last year included Nomad ($190 million) in August, Harmony ($100 million) in June, Ronin ($625 million) during March, and Wormhole ($326 million) at the beginning of February.

 

[artis]

This is getting so technical I would need a special course on what is a "cross chain bridge" before I can understand the importance of whatever was hacked.

Notable cross-chain bridge hacks last year included Nomad ($190 million) in August, Harmony ($100 million) in June, Ronin ($625 million) during March, and Wormhole ($326 million) at the beginning of February.

Whoever came up with those names must be a cosmology enthusiast.

 

[Office_Shredder]

This is getting so technical I would need a special course on what is a "cross chain bridge" before I can understand the importance of whatever was hacked.

A cross chain bridge is basically an atm for crypto. If you have bitcoin and you want ethereum, one way to do that is sell your bitcoin for dollars, then buy ethereum with dollars, all on a centralized exchange. That's annoying, so the exchanges will do you one better and let you trade bitcoin for ethereum directly. But using an exchange sucks (see ftx). A cross chain bridge is a decentralized protocol that works kind of like any crypto thing works - the rules are well defined, and everyone agrees on what operation is happening. The operation in this case is you can send bitcoin to an address, and specify where you want your ethereum, and it willsend ethereum to you. To support this is needs a pot of ethereum (and bitcoin, since it permits moves both ways). Investors put their coins "in the bridge", and the bridge makes money by charging you a fee for your transfer.

Of course i haven't said what the relative value of ethereum and bitcoin is on this bridge. They usually just look at on- exchange trading I believe (I'm a bit fuzzy on how this actually works in practice in a decentralized way). The traditional way to hack a bridge is to manipulate on exchange trading prices, and then do a big swap at a price that everyone agrees is dumb, but the bridge doesn't know that.

Bitcoin and ethereum are actually a really bad example for this - You want to pick a really illiquid alt coin that's worth nothing, buy a bunch, then manipulate the price up, then swap is at a bridge for bitcoin.

I'm very much an amateur so the details here are questionable, but I think this is the broad stroke description of what is happening. I believe there are other attacks that look more like real hacks, where you carefully understand the protocol and figure out some way that the bridge will get confused by what ratio to swap at.

 

[Vanadium 50]

The bridge seems to be a classic case of solving the wrong problem.

The problem is you have zillions of illiquid cryptocurrencies. Like 100x as many as national currencies, Proping up the system is unhelpful. Propping it up in a manner that permits fraud doubly so.

If I wanted to exchange Iranian Riols for Vietnamese Dong, I would probably have to go through a major currency like Euros or Yen. Annoying, yes, but is this really a problem?

 

[Office_Shredder]

The bridge seems to be a classic case of solving the wrong problem.

The problem is you have zillions of illiquid cryptocurrencies. Like 100x as many as national currencies, Proping up the system is unhelpful. Propping it up in a manner that permits fraud doubly so.

If I wanted to exchange Iranian Riols for Vietnamese Dong, I would probably have to go through a major currency like Euros or Yen. Annoying, yes, but is this really a problem?

It is easy to manipulate the exchange rate between mango coins and bitcoin, so requiring one side to be a major currency doesn't help things. The main issue is the bridge is just running a very bad market making strategy that has no risk controls or manual oversight.

 

[russ_watters]

The bridge seems to be a classic case of solving the wrong problem.

The problem is you have zillions of illiquid cryptocurrencies. Like 100x as many as national currencies, Proping up the system is unhelpful. Propping it up in a manner that permits fraud doubly so.

If I wanted to exchange Iranian Riols for Vietnamese Dong, I would probably have to go through a major currency like Euros or Yen. Annoying, yes, but is this really a problem?

I think you're missing what "the problem" is here. For crypto believers, The Problem is always fiat currencies. This bridge solves that problem.

Now, another way to solve that problem would certainly be to adopt a single cryptocurrency, but I'm not sure crypto believers want that. I think they should, but I'm skeptical of what the believers actually believe/want.

 

[Vanadium 50]

Cryptocurriencies are fiat currencies. Thy just have different people doing the fiating.

The people involved fall into three categories:
1. People who want to buy and sell illegal products.
2. People who dislike the gubmint on principle.
3. Peopler who hope to srrike it rich, possibly by sketchy means.

All have reasons to want to avoid government oversight, but not the same ones.

 

[Vanadium 50]

Amazing fact - there are 20x as much BTC in circulation as USD in physical circulation.

 

[Vanadium 50]

If all the BTC transactions in the world were for goods and services, the GDP of Bitcoinistan would be between that of the Federated States of Micronesia and the Republic of the Marshall Islands.

Neither of which have their own currency.

 

[russ_watters]

Cryptocurriencies are fiat currencies. Thy just have different people doing the fiating.

Ok, I guess I've fallen for cryptobro parlance/spin. How about "government sponsored currencies"?

Amazing fact - there are 20x as much BTC in circulation as USD in physical circulation.

That's a weird comparison.

 

[Office_Shredder]

For some definition of physical, there are no btc in circulation...

 

[Astronuc]

There’s a wild theory that the price of Bitcoin is being propped up—and the academic who proved manipulation in 2017 suspects it may be happening again
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/wild-theory-price-bitcoin-being-110000608.html

As Griffin and Amin Shams, then a doctoral candidate at McCombs who’s joined Griffin in several gumshoe investigations, screened for misdeeds in 2017, they were fascinated to see that a little-known token that’s supposed to be backed one-for-one to the dollar was getting printed in large quantities. That clue led the pair to another: When new batches appeared, the price of Bitcoin seemed to jump. It looked like someone, or a group, was using that freshly printed “free money” to inflate Bitcoin’s price for their own profit. He and his coauthor Shams sifted through an incredible 200 gigabytes of trading data, equal to the troves that the Smithsonian Institution collects in two years, and followed sales and purchases from 2.5 million separate wallets.

In 2018, they coauthored a groundbreaking study showing that a single, still unidentified, Bitcoin “whale” almost single-handedly drove the token’s giant run-up in late 2017 and early 2018 by distorting the trading in the token.

Toward the end of 2022, another mystifying trend caught Griffin’s eye. Despite the crypto crash and myriad other negative forces, every time Bitcoin briefly breached the $16,000 floor, it bounced above that level and kept stubbornly trading between $16,000 and $17,000. Almost unbelievably, as the crypto market has continued to unravel into 2023, Bitcoin has gone in the opposite direction, trading up 35% since Jan. 7 to $23,000.

“It’s very suspicious,” Griffin told Fortune. “The same mechanism we saw in 2017 could be at play now in the still unreal Bitcoin market.”

Interesting read. It would appear some actors are manipulating Bitcoin - in the open.

 

[Vanadium 50]

Is it even illgal to do that? (And isn't part of the point of crypto to get away from all those icky laws and regulations?)

 

[fluidistic]

A cross chain bridge is basically an atm for crypto. If you have bitcoin and you want ethereum, one way to do that is sell your bitcoin for dollars, then buy ethereum with dollars, all on a centralized exchange. That's annoying, so the exchanges will do you one better and let you trade bitcoin for ethereum directly. But using an exchange sucks (see ftx). A cross chain bridge is a decentralized protocol that works kind of like any crypto thing works - the rules are well defined, and everyone agrees on what operation is happening. The operation in this case is you can send bitcoin to an address, and specify where you want your ethereum, and it willsend ethereum to you. To support this is needs a pot of ethereum (and bitcoin, since it permits moves both ways). Investors put their coins "in the bridge", and the bridge makes money by charging you a fee for your transfer.

Of course i haven't said what the relative value of ethereum and bitcoin is on this bridge. They usually just look at on- exchange trading I believe (I'm a bit fuzzy on how this actually works in practice in a decentralized way). The traditional way to hack a bridge is to manipulate on exchange trading prices, and then do a big swap at a price that everyone agrees is dumb, but the bridge doesn't know that.

Bitcoin and ethereum are actually a really bad example for this - You want to pick a really illiquid alt coin that's worth nothing, buy a bunch, then manipulate the price up, then swap is at a bridge for bitcoin.

I'm very much an amateur so the details here are questionable, but I think this is the broad stroke description of what is happening. I believe there are other attacks that look more like real hacks, where you carefully understand the protocol and figure out some way that the bridge will get confused by what ratio to swap at.

I don't think that's what a cross chain bridge is. What you describe relates more to a liquidity pool.
From what I understood, a cross chain bridge is a system to convert, say your bitcoins on the Bitcoin's blockchain, to something equivalent (i.e. pegged 1 to 1 with BTC) on another blockchain. Sometimes they share the same name but they are definitely not quite the same. This is achieved by the use of smart contracts (i.e. computer codes having nasty exploitable bugs), and liquidity pools.

 

[Astronuc]

• Four new charges against Sam Bankman-Fried were unsealed on Thursday.
• Prosecutors say FTX.US was denied opening a California bank account as it wasn't a licensed money services business.
• So SBF created a new company to take customer deposits, an indictment says.

https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/prosecutors-sam-bankman-fried-helped-170639354.html

When a California bank refused to give FTX an account in early 2020 because it wasn't registered as a money services business, prosecutors say that Sam Bankman-Fried started a new company to skirt that prohibition, and subsequently made false statements on a due dilligence questionnaire.

The allegations form part of new charges against Bankman-Fried unsealed this week for conspiracy to commit bank fraud, and conspiracy to operate an unlicensed money-transmitting business – two of four new counts that were made public Thursday. The bank's name was not revealed in the court filing.

While the company didn't appear to have any links to FTX or its sister hedge fund, Alameda, the SEC said "Bankman-Fried had directed FTX to have customers send funds to North Dimension in an effort to hide the fact that the funds were being sent to an account controlled by Alameda."

APNews - FTX’s Bankman-Fried faces new charges in updated indictment
https://apnews.com/article/technolo...nts-business-ceb821b5cd36052bf146c2119ca7f1dd