>>39639
You sobered up.

>>39637

> I recognise she has 'interesting' features, but that can be a good thing. I wonder what her voice sounds like. I wonder how she moves.


Knock yourself out, lad.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zfcb9JAgWBs

I'm glad crypto is falling apart. Never liked it, never trusted it. Never gambled on it (you can hardly call it investing). The only ones making steady profits are those who sell the shovels for the gold rush. As always.

>>39642
Without knowing WTF I'm talking about, I imagine this is the 'dip' people say you should buy.

>>39643
This looks more like a decline than a dip. Buying in now looks like becoming Roman Emperor in 435AD.

>>39641
"Never in my career have I seen such a complete failure of corporate controls"

https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/65748821/24/ftx-trading-ltd/

This one is going to unravel in a spectacular way.

>>39641
God I wish she'd take all my money and invest it in obviously nonsensical scam projects.

>>39647
That's an incredibly realistic wish to have.

>>39646

>This one is going to unravel in a spectacular way.


I can't wait to learn all about it when Netflix turns it into a TV series.

It is the perfect plot to illustrate the degeneracy of crypto broness. A bunch of 20something kids operating a sizeable international corporation from nothing more than a penthouse in the Bahamas, who have evidently spent more time all fucking each other silly and consuming Class A drugs than attempting to get an actual grasp of what they were doing in the financial markets.

>>39649
>I can't wait to learn all about it when Netflix turns it into a TV series.

Michael Lewis is an ex-Salomon Brothers bond trader who has written a few interesting books about the financial markets - Liars Poker and The Big Short are very accurate (I also worked at Salomon Brothers a very long time ago and can attest to Liars Poker accuracy).

He has apparently spent the past six months living and travelling with these fuckwits. I am quite sure the book / film / Netflix will be excellent.

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/11/18/former-theranos-ceo-elizabeth-holmes-sentenced-to-more-than-11-years-in-prison.html

>Theranos founder Elizabeth Holmes sentenced to more than 11 years in prison


Bit of a hint of what's in store for SBF.

Good to see that the American justice system still has ways of making fraudsters profoundly bleed from the arse.

>>39656

Don't pretend that these people are getting banged up because of any moral or principle objection to what they're doing. Merely because they did it under the noses of the people who think the things they were doing are their business.

>>39657

True enough. If you remember the "pharma bro" Martin Shkreli, he didn't go to prison for jacking up the price of that one cancer related drug; he went in because ha wronged some of the big investor names on Wall Street who were well connected enough to be able to have him put behind bars.

>>39657
I get what you're saying, but both Sam Bankman-Fried and Elizabeth "The Way of The Voice" Holmes committed massive fraud. I know us serfs get mugged in a hundred-thousand perfectly legal ways every day, but fraud is fraud, it doesn't make these people Robin Hood because some rich people got burnt by them. SBF's literally on the record as saying, more or less, "ethics are for mugs" and Holmes became a billionaire by cosying up to some all time Yankee villains and selling snake oil. Both are from incredibly wealthy families. No one gets banged up because of "moral or principle objections", it happens because you are found to have broken the law. Laws that amount to "don't rob people blind" are, in my opinion, pretty solid ones.

>>39659
>it doesn't make these people Robin Hood because some rich people got burnt by them
> Laws that amount to "don't rob people blind" are, in my opinion, pretty solid ones.

Completely agreed. Nobody can say that SBF and Elizabeth Holmes haven't caused people harm - it's flat out fraud and they should be punished.

The other interesting angle to this story is how much money SBF has given to the Democrats - that part could run and run.

>>39660

>The other interesting angle to this story is how much money SBF has given to the Democrats - that part could run and run.

Exactly. He greased a lot of Democrat palms in an attempt to have laws and regulations passed that would have been favourable to his business (and nobody else). All you need to do is follow the money, and I'm sure there'll be loads of embarrassing revelations about his ties to politicians.

Which could explain why he hasn't been charged with anything yet and hasn't been extradited from the Bahamas. Right now he just spends his days making very poorly advised tweets and pulling the noose even tighter around his neck. I'm not sure what American authorities are waiting for.

>>39661
I think the Federales are simply building a case against SBF. This happened less than a week ago and I'm quite certain he's still wealthy enough to get himself quality legal representation. I also have no idea just how unregulated crypto is, but I'm sure there are huge pitfalls any prosecution will have to avoid if it doesn't want him to walk on a technicality that amounts to "no one said I couldn't play roulette with my funny money".

>>39660
>The other interesting angle to this story is how much money SBF has given to the Democrats - that part could run and run.
Man who wants favourable legislation gives money to party of government shocker.

>>39628
8% of FTX customers were UK based? This is nuts.

>>39666

As somebody who has never owned a single unit of cryptocurrency or indeed a crypto wallet, I'm wondering why these people parked their money on a crypto exchange anyway. Aren't there other ways you can buy and sell bitcoin etc, besides leaving it in an unregulated exchange account where it could be here today and gone tomorrow if the exchange owners decide to just fuck off with all your coins, which we have seen numerous times now.

I've got a bog standard share dealing account at Halifax, where I also have my current account and an ISA. Granted, I'm no trader and the most risky thing I've ever touched was a leveraged Dow ETF, and I buy and sell anything at all less than about 20 times a year, but I know that my assets are with one of the biggest names in banking, and that I will get them back even if they go tits up. I gather that most crypto exchanges have promised the same, but look where we are now.

This should be one of the first things to consider before you ever give a single quid of your money to anybody.

>>39667
>an unregulated exchange account where it could be here today and gone tomorrow if the exchange owners decide to just fuck off with all your coins,
>This should be one of the first things to consider before you ever give a single quid of your money to anybody.


Are they FCA regulated? Okay, I might lose my money on this trade but I know I'll be treated decently.

Are they not FCA regulated? This is a total crapshoot and I'm definitely probably going to lose all my money.

>>39668

>Okay, I might lose my money on this trade

Most traders lose money to begin with. Less than one percent are long-term profitable. It's not your major respected bank's fault if you get an arse kicking trading highly risky stock options, penny stocks, CFDs, illiquid coins, or whatever else toxic instruments the finance industry throws at unwitting retail investors/traders.

Doing all that via a non-FCA exchange only marginally adds to your risk. You will quite likely see your money disappear either way.

https://cointelegraph.com/news/genesis-denies-imminent-plans-to-file-for-bankruptcy



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rY0WxgSXdEE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ER4vt5ei7sg

Interesting summary.

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/12/12/ftx-founder-sam-bankman-fried-arrested-in-the-bahamas-after-us-files-criminal-charges.html

>FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried arrested in the Bahamas after U.S. files criminal charges


Sure took them long enough.

He was really beginning to get on everybody's tits, attempting to make it look like he was just some unwitting crypto bro who was in over his head with only the best intentions.

But I guess if you're facing potential decades in federal prison, you'll do anything.

>>39687
It's more like this is how long the US government needs to build a proper case against you. I can't believe he was still sitting in the Bahamas like everything was going to blow over.

They're now saying that his former girlfriend who was in charge of Alameda will accept a plea deal and roll over on SBF.

He's done for.

Posted without comment.

>>41214
I fancy her.

>>41214
Still think she's cute ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

>>41215
>>41221

Maybe for an ugly wank.

>>41222
I think she's suffering from unflattering angles, but I don't know which ones would be flattering for her.

I don't know how many times I've said this over the years but if we all fancied the same bird then we not only couldn't be friends but none of us would ever get a leg over. Celebrate diversity.

>>41224
I bet she moans like a Japanese porn star because her primary exposure to sex has been watching hentai; are you saying you wouldn't be into that?

>>41225

>Celebrate diversity.

By all means.

But I hope you're still allowed to have an opinion on .gs. Even if it's not flattering.

>>41225
>Celebrate diversity.
There's a word for that. Ebony.

Also, she was probably just protecting her own interests by not wanting to go down together with Bankman-Fried, but does it seem disturbing to you two that she almost instantly rolled over on her ex-boyfriend and then became instrumental in his conviction? A great deal of the prosecution's case was resting solely on her testimony.

Women are often quick to jump ship when you're in a tight spot. Yes, the prospect of spending decades in prison instead will be a test to any feeling of loyalty. But she was really wasting no time collaborating with authorities.

>>41230
>but does it seem disturbing to you two that she almost instantly rolled over on her ex-boyfriend
How many of your exes would you be willing to spend fifteen years in super max for? Keep in mind you know they're guilty as sin because you were agreeing with them whenever they said "let's do crimes now". So too right she "wasted no time", there are half-a-dozen other witnesses who would have sold her down the river as well as Bankman-Fried, she didn't have time to waste. Besides, I doubt even if she was having her own trial Sam's defense attorneys would have a better story than "she did it".

I don't know, man, I think it's less about the woman and more about the massive financial crimes you commit with that woman. Or man. Or enby. Just say no to gargantuan, global, fraud!

>>41230
I can't speak on behalf of women, but if I could get out of a maximum of 115 years in US federal prison (where there is no parole and the entire sentence is custodial) by simply telling on someone who stole billions, I'd probably take that deal too.

>>41232

Right, but what if you were directly involved in stealing those billions? And what if you were in a romantic relationship with someone who was also stealing those billions?

>>41231
> there are half-a-dozen other witnesses who would have sold her down the river as well as Bankman-Fried

Seems to conflict with >>41230's idea that
>A great deal of the prosecution's case was resting solely on her testimony.

It's obviously hard to know the ins and outs of the case and each individual's options, but I think we're being a bit quick to excuse someone who absolutely was directly involved with executing the fraud. Remember that Caroline Ellison was the CEO of Alameda. FTX lent Alameda about $10 billion, and a large part of the holdings of Alameda were in FTX's currency, FTT.

Without Alameda, the fraud would not have been possible.

Even if we take personal integrity out of the equation entirely, I find it questionable that Ellison would be allowed to "flip" in order to go after the "top man", when in reality it was very much a shared operation between four or so people.

>>41233

>I find it questionable that Ellison would be allowed to "flip" in order to go after the "top man", when in reality it was very much a shared operation between four or so people.

That's the nature of plea deals. Everybody gets something. You will get a reduced sentence or even no prison time at all, while the prosecution gets to build a more solid case against the other defendants.

I think Caroline Ellison is actually facing up to five years in prison even with this deal, which means that she doesn't get to go free entirely. But with good conduct, she'll probably be out in two to three. While even the most lenient judge will probably give Bankman-Fried at least 30.

What's interesting is that sentencing guidelines are non-binding in the U.S.; if you follow them to a T, he'll be eligible for 110 years. But at the judge's discretion, it could be far less.

>>41234

I get what you're saying, but the ratio of 2 or 3 years compared to 30 doesn't seem to reflect their actual level of involvement in the crime. As I say, it could not have taken place without Ellison at the head of Alameda.

I understand why plea deals are necessary in some cases if you're trying to get to the route of some well-executed criminal conspiracy, but as far as I understand, they've basically got an electronic record of the trades involved in the massive fraud and a series of communications confirming their intention to commit massive fraud.

If >>41230 is right that the prosecution is depending on Ellison's testimony, I would struggle to fully get why. It really seems like everyone has been caught with their pants down. Even the lawyer that's taken over FTX to sort the mess has said that it must have been run by "a very small group of inexperienced, unsophisticated and potentially compromised individuals". Maybe there's some legal nuance I don't understand that makes it necessary get Ellison on board.

>>41235

Get to the root*. Bloody Brian.

>>41233
>Seems to conflict with >>41230's idea that
Not at all. The prosecution have her cooperation so they're using it, but if they didn't they'd have gotten someone else.

I think you're right to question plea deals. I don't know much about them, but they seem like a way for prosecutors in the states to get an easy "win", even if it means, more or less, letting off other villains and crims.

>>41237

> I don't know much about them, but they seem like a way for prosecutors in the states to get an easy "win", even if it means, more or less, letting off other villains and crims.


And not only that. Especially if you're poor in the United States and can't afford a proper lawyer, authorities will put pressure on you to accept a plea to avoid a lengthy court case. You can often still get a reduction on your tariff that way, but especially if your guilt in a case isn't that clear, it can happen that you'll accept a plea deal and end up going to prison for something that a proper lawyer could have got you out of.

>>41233
>Right, but what if you were directly involved in stealing those billions?
Then I've got even more incentive to do things that get me not sent to jail for 115 years.

>>41238
Plea deals, and overworked public defenders, result in people taking deals for things they didn't actually do, and then have no recourse because you can't appeal against having pleaded guilty.

>>41244

The difference between a plea deal and a potential sentence at trial can be so vast - six months of probation versus a decade in prison - that it's often rational to take the deal even if you know you're innocent and think you can prove it. More than 99% of convictions in the US are secured without a full trial, which is very much by design.

>>41245
It is going to be fascinating to see how long he gets. I think it will be a very long time indeed.

>>41247

I was disappointed to see Elizabeth Holmes get a relatively light sentence. Even though the financial damage she caused investors was much smaller than that of SBF. With good conduct, she'll barely serve half of the 11 years they gave her.