on compliance impossibility:
now that folks are focused on compliance because they are afraid of facilitating terrorism xfers....lets look at how it's not possible for the types of systems people want
@BenCharoenwong posted our preprint last week
https://t.co/oL6TGjx9dt
@elenahatfield_@BaldingsWorld Some excellent south philly restaurants were also more less open fronts. You could see the fbi cars outside cafe lido - the sautéed peppers were still delicious and free flow.
Ppl dont recognise how common money laundering has been in the us for a long long time.
With the bet it is:
Loose -> unknown more customers - wager amount
Win -> bet payoff - unknown cost of drinks
Yes this adds something to the loss and reduces the gain. Its less risky but not magic. Both outcomes can still be a loss!
The kalshi-bar-knicks "hedge" is a great illustration of hedge effectiveness and how sports gambling doesnt 100% fix real biz problems.
By taking this bet the bar is changing their payoff profile but it is still risky...
Kalshi's first example of a small business using it as hedging tool is The Jeffrey, an NYC bar that's promising free drinks to all customers if New York Knicks wins NBA Finals Game 1 on Wednesday
The old payoff was:
Knicks loose -> uncertain gain from more customers
Knicks win -> large loss free drinks
This is clearly risky with one +ve and one -ve
@ponzi_nomic Once the convert bit is worthless they're gonna have to pay cash sure. But he can earn more on usd than the notes cost to carry, even including the 8pct accounting gain so no clue
In the us you normally only get done for securities fraud after the price drops a lot.
The notes mstr repuchased that used up their cash are the puttable notes that made these 2024 comments false. Lol
Cases dont get easier than this.
if this isnt material misrepresentation then nothing is
hes asked if there is an ability for debt holders to recall the debt. answer is that its convertible debt, theyll redeem with stock if needed and basically "no"
but the bonds are puttable for cash!
https://t.co/q7aRqeQ1rY
@willo2_Poly Uma does not promise you the truth. It promises you the truth under certain optimistic conditions that do not always occur.
You were not scammed - you were ignorant. You didn't know what you were really betting on.
Obv I agree it's a dumb product but its so user error using it.
@diogenes@zachxbt@zama@PatagonLLC why do you expect intellectual honesty or consistency from that crowd? their only firm position seems to be that their opinions are correct and everyone else is wrong...
@sashahodler@J_Mcryptolaw sorry you are their lawyer and you are admitting your client had an inaccurate understanding of a contract they signed? wasn't it your job to make sure this didn't happen?
if you didn't represent them in this area fair enough but this sounds, um, not ideal for marketing.
@ChainLinkGod@mv1_Davis@LayerZero_Labs@HankJr a) this will get litigated for the 3rd (at least) time in kelp so we will see court's view
b) i think chainlink's lawyers know exactly what they are doing yes
c) its amazing what a lot of crypto lawyers will admit privately
@ChainLinkGod@mv1_Davis@LayerZero_Labs you agree its ~same as the aave and arbitrum mechanisms used to respond to the kelp hack. ok. are those permissioned groups unincorporated general partnerships with liability for members? as @HankJr says: unexplained fires are a matter for the courts.
https://t.co/GfX88L6t6G
@ChainLinkGod@mv1_Davis@LayerZero_Labs not trying to debate ccip design just a general point. tho since you raised it...
ccip urgent process is +/- the same as aave's guardian and arbitrum's security council. its certainly not the same as, say, bitcoin upgrades because a small identifiable group signs off explicitly.
@ChainLinkGod@mv1_Davis@LayerZero_Labs thats all reasonable and of course im not defending these clowns. however arguing ppl should be comfortable trusting a team w/ a timelock is arguing that team should be legally accountable if they do screw up.
thats intellectually honest sure. it's probably also accurate. but...
@ChainLinkGod@mv1_Davis@LayerZero_Labs "the lockbox is camouflaged"
what you are saying is true fair enough. but "my multisig is better than your multisig" reminds me too much of this bit.
https://t.co/UvvImxqqgN
Details of how so many of these are outlaw. The only things that's immutable about many of these systems is the evidence they were always centrally controlled.
https://t.co/mHQGzumfL3
fake-d dexes: some research on @Aster_DEX and @HyperliquidX
a detailed exploration of how both of these platforms have central operators despite of their public claims.
each is a different flavour of fake, but fake-d nonetheless.
as usual blog posts have full details...
Remember that hyperliquid, like many platforms, can use the playback aave is using for "safety" on the Kelp mess to take all user deposits.
Tho the sanctions problems seem better at getting attention these days...
@RnaudBertrand Comparison to 72 v wrong. That this visit would occur roughly then long been public. I know us amb (ksa, egypt, etc) kissinger saw on the secret trip to china to cover arab-israel negos. kissinger didnt tell *him* he was planning the fake illness in pakistan. Thats real secret.
Too rarely does anyone *test* these failovers. I was in the Morgan Stanley ny hq during the 2003 blackout and things worked (ex the aircon). They did test and it showed.
Its too rare sadly & have seen this many times since. Dont accept these failures. Engineers need to engineer
> We run a primary replica of our exchange infrastructure in a single zone, consistent with industry standards to reduce latency.
Primary & fallback architecture always sounds nice in theory but works poorly in reality. When you have some “standby” you never really use, and don’t do regular rehearsal to test fallback, they likely won’t work in the real disaster scenario, but you still pay for the redundant capacity 🥲