Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

> Judge Dorsey ultimately overruled objections to their retention by two individual FTX creditors.

I think Molly White defaults to too much credibility in judges and lawyers.

SBF's main argument is that Sullivan & Cromwell misled him into going the Chapter 11 route, which he later learned was more motivated by its ability to make hundreds of millions rather than helping his customers. He made a mistake in trusting them. All entrepreneurs make mistakes in trusting people they should not.

He admits to serious mistakes with Alameda etc, but believes those were recoverable. I would agree—the crypto market is huge and so important—and think as long as all customers get their money back, that it was fixable.

I think S&C has done a terrible job with FTX since taking over since the bankruptcy, so find SBF's argument to have merit.

SBF's main message to entrepreneurs, which I think is a good one: be more transparent, and be careful who you trust.

Source: I think I have $30,000 in my FTX.us account, so if anything I should be biased against SBF/FTX. But I am currently dealing with a dishonest lawyer and incompetent judge in the San Diego Family Law Cartel, so I am biased against the system at the moment.




SBF's main mistake wasn't trusting Sullivan & Cromwell. That is the lie that SBF is trying to tell. While that may have been a "mistake" to declare bankruptcy, it was because it reduced FTX's ability to try to hide the fraud it had been perpetuating.

FTX was already incredibly insolvent at that point because FTX gave Alameda an unlimited line of credit and then used that credit to take loans from Alameda to line their own pockets with what was effectively FTX's customer deposits.


>>then used that credit to take loans from Alameda to line their own pockets with what was effectively FTX's customer deposits.

that's small fraction. most were spent and lost betting the crypto market


S&C basically invented modern white collar crime. It's hard to find outside of libraries, but: https://www.amazon.com/Law-Unto-Itself-Sullivan-Cromwell/dp/... is an exceptional read on their history.

(I still think Crypto is worthless, but the concerns about S&C in this case are likely very legitimate!)


Wow, that book is apparently hard to get. Two copies available, $60 and $240.

Good ol' Archie. https://archive.org/download/alawuntoitselftheuntoldstoryoft...


> the crypto market is … so important

Citation desperately needed.


Crypto is a 24/7 global, resilient payments network. It increases the velocity and transparency of money, which will have a huge impact on global economy.

Also, if you think customers losing a $8B to FTX is bad, wait until you read about retail banks in the USA taking $30B a year from their customers: https://breckyunits.com/the-great-bank-robbery.html


>Crypto is a 24/7 global, resilient payments network.

Man, your mind is gonna be blown when you realise that you can have that _right_ now! All you have to do is move to a first world country*

*like the UK or any country in the EEA. US not included.

I jest, but my point is serious. This is already a reality for anyone living in Europe. It's a political problem (is a 24/7 global payment network important to people in democracies), and incidentally, crypto also faces the same political problem.

"ohhh but it's permissionless" yeah nah no one is taking in magic beans for value


> you have to do is move to a first world country*...US not included.

I know. It's embarrassing. I remember in New Zealand in 2011 had better payments tech than USA in 2023.


> All you have to do is move to a first world country*

If you move to the UK you will have 24/7 payments to all other countries?


When? It's been 13 years.


> Crypto is a 24/7 global, resilient payments network.

Which crypto?


I pay almost all our team with NEAR coin. USA, Europe, Middle East, Africa, Pakistan, India, etc.

No problems.

All of my headaches come from a the very few I can't pay with crypto (Venmo, paypal, etc).


It might be true that FTX customers would be better off with FTX still running with or without SBF. But that does not negate the fact that lending customer money to Almeda is capital F fraud.


> But that does not negate the fact that lending customer money to Almeda is capital F fraud.

I think you are probably right here. If SBF does not have the ability to make customers whole, then I agree.


It’s only fraud if the money is lost?

Or is the fraud doing something that was contractually (legally?) prohibited?


> He made a mistake in trusting them.

Oh, come on. He purports to be a finance wizard, not some startup bro. If S&C turned him over, that's because he was a sucker, not a wizard. Finance wizards don't go into Ch. 11 with their eyes closed.


How in the world would everybody get their money back except via another scam token like FTT?




Join us for AI Startup School this June 16-17 in San Francisco!

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: