7 ms·

What probably happened here is one VC played the 'pump and dump' game for one of these tokens 'gamed' by SBF then shared that with other VCs. Before you know it

What probably happened here is one VC played the 'pump and dump' game for one of these tokens 'gamed' by SBF then shared that with other VCs. Before you know it, that fucker had clients lining up to him to invest in his 'proven' scheme no questions asked. Greed was the main theme here, not lack of due diligence.

twawaaay 4y ago
What greed does is make people blind and deaf to reality when that reality does not agree with their beliefs. Whether they knew or did not knew the facts is irrelevant to me. Does it really make a difference which scenario happened? a) They decided to forgo research ("better not do it in case the findings will endanger my bonus") b) They did research but decided to not act on it because they already committed themselves to making the decision There are technical legal differences here but for me in both cases you just failed in your responsibility for somebody's assets.
- anonymoushn 4y ago
  Can you cite the research you performed in the last few years that allows you to differentiate between exchanges that are scams and exchanges that are not scams?
  - Operative0198 4y ago
    The question has too many variables. Though none of these exchanges are regulated by any authority so it's impossible to know which one will disappear with your money tomorrow.
- Operative0198 4y ago
  AFAIK Almost all crypto companies operate in the dark. There's little due diligence to be had when none is (legally) required. I recall coming across a clip of Chamath Palihapitiya, a prominent VC saying he once had the opportunity to invest in one of SBF's companies and demanding he (SBF) create some corporate governance in order for him to invest and SBF blew him off. There were clearly some concessions made by thirsty VC firms to pass on the due diligence in the promise of 'guaranteed' returns. Does any of this information matter to clients? Ofc not when they continue to get their annual dividends from the VC firms. Crypto is just one piece in the basket of investments for them. The smart VCs hopefully didn't invest too much of their allocation.
rvba 4y ago
All those tokens are pump and dump. They exchanged dogs "worth" 1 milloon each for 2 cats "worth" 0,5 millon each - and some people would come and buy this crap at those valuations. Once the music stopped playing (no more bagholders coming to buy) turned out that dogs and cats valuation is closer to zero than to millions. What is the reason to value any of those junk tokens more than 0? Bitcoin is at least "the" original. The 700 other shitcoins are just shit.

twawaaay 4y ago

What greed does is make people blind and deaf to reality when that reality does not agree with their beliefs. Whether they knew or did not knew the facts is irrelevant to me. Does it really make a difference which scenario happened? a) They decided to forgo research ("better not do it in case the findings will endanger my bonus") b) They did research but decided to not act on it because they already committed themselves to making the decision There are technical legal differences here but for me in both cases you just failed in your responsibility for somebody's assets.

anonymoushn 4y ago
Can you cite the research you performed in the last few years that allows you to differentiate between exchanges that are scams and exchanges that are not scams?
- Operative0198 4y ago
  The question has too many variables. Though none of these exchanges are regulated by any authority so it's impossible to know which one will disappear with your money tomorrow.
Operative0198 4y ago
AFAIK Almost all crypto companies operate in the dark. There's little due diligence to be had when none is (legally) required. I recall coming across a clip of Chamath Palihapitiya, a prominent VC saying he once had the opportunity to invest in one of SBF's companies and demanding he (SBF) create some corporate governance in order for him to invest and SBF blew him off. There were clearly some concessions made by thirsty VC firms to pass on the due diligence in the promise of 'guaranteed' returns. Does any of this information matter to clients? Ofc not when they continue to get their annual dividends from the VC firms. Crypto is just one piece in the basket of investments for them. The smart VCs hopefully didn't invest too much of their allocation.

rvba 4y ago

All those tokens are pump and dump. They exchanged dogs "worth" 1 milloon each for 2 cats "worth" 0,5 millon each - and some people would come and buy this crap at those valuations. Once the music stopped playing (no more bagholders coming to buy) turned out that dogs and cats valuation is closer to zero than to millions. What is the reason to value any of those junk tokens more than 0? Bitcoin is at least "the" original. The 700 other shitcoins are just shit.