Like Tree143Likes

FTX and Biance

Reply
Page 11 of 21 FirstFirst ... 3 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 19 ... LastLast
  1. #101

    With this whole saga still unfolding, are our USA shares/stocks invested in broker say for ex: IB even safe ? who I go after if IB goes bust?

    The ICF in hong kong only covers financial products traded on the HKEX, and Northbound securities traded through Shanghai and Shenzhen Stock Connect. For both securities trading and futures contracts trading, the maximum amount of compensation is HK$500,000 per investor per case.

    what about my USA shares/ETF?Does SIPC USA covers me up to 250k cash and 500k stocks/etfs as a hong kong resident or SIPC insure only USA citizens? Or is even IB-HK insured by SIPC?

    More on IB hong hong website ?

    https://www.interactivebrokers.com.h...&p=acc&conf=am

    Gollygordon likes this.

  2. #102

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Sai Kung
    Posts
    5,708

    More than a year ago I decided I don’t understand crypto, and stopped pretending that I did. Especially I couldn’t get my head around the concept of no supporting asset underneath a coin. So sold whatever little I had invested and since then didn’t really bother to check any news. This thread is great.

    Elefant&Castle and huja like this.

  3. #103
    Quote Originally Posted by jgl:
    This is like saying that the price of a simple drug being jacked up 57 times overnight was down to Martin Shkreli being a 'bad man' and that there is no inherent flaw built into the pharmaceutical IP system.

    The problem is both, and that 'crypto' attracts people who have no clue what it's about, and people who can feed on them.
    Guess you guys should all avoid banks then (Lehmann, Iceland etc). Or asset managers (Madoff et al).

    As I've said elsewhere, real crypto platforms exists literally to remove the trust required for a fraud like FTX to perpetrated. It isn't the asset in the exchange that's the issue, it's the fact that one man can do one he wants in that exchange with no on realising.

    If you disagree, let me know how the Devs of an decentralised perps platform like DyDx would steal user funds (assuming no errors in code, properly audited before us etc)?
    calmathetic9 likes this.

  4. #104

    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    23,619

    Steal made-up money? Steal shitcoins? Who knows, who cares? crypto is and always has been a giant Ponzi scheme with zero inherent use… the supporting infrastructure like exchanges should all go to zero too.


  5. #105
    Quote Originally Posted by gunsnroses:
    More than a year ago I decided I don’t understand crypto, and stopped pretending that I did. Especially I couldn’t get my head around the concept of no supporting asset underneath a coin. So sold whatever little I had invested and since then didn’t really bother to check any news. This thread is great.
    I know what you mean - but the "no supporting asset" isn't unique to crypto. I'm just amazed so many institutional investors have piled in and lent support by owning it - of course normal people are going to get greedy and jump on too when they do that.

    Recently read this book - best one I have seen if you are trying to understand the technology
    https://www.amazon.com.mx/Mastering-.../dp/1491954388

    Not hard to set up the software on your own laptop (it's on github) - although at this point I would say just barely, because the 'blockchain' - all the old transactions going back to the original genesis block is quite large and growing all the time. You have sync those before you start mining. At least tangible assets don't have that burden.

    Also - there is the issue with lost bitcoins - I think it's 4% of all bitcoins that disappear every year because people send them to "dead" wallets, forget their passwords or die without passing on their keys...That can't go on - smallest unit is a satoshi and at some point even those will be rare...

  6. #106

    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    薄扶林
    Posts
    44,391
    I'm just amazed so many insti]tutional investors have piled in and lent support by owning it - of course normal people are going to get greedy and jump on too when they do that.
    Not just investing in coins.. but failing by what I think are their own esg standards and investing in associated companies.

    In general I am a 'in blackrock I trust' type of person but had to go back and review reports related to some speculated closed ends funds I am in to see if they have any exposure in the crypto space.

    Thankfully in my case the ones I am in are not invested in shitcoin related companies.

  7. #107

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Cramped island
    Posts
    5,164

    Draw some analogy to this :

    https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/a...stomers-money/

    Not that different.. money/asset from client used to invest to improve profit and unfortunately burnt.. and segregated account money are also now missing.

    Gollygordon likes this.

  8. #108

    how come institutional investors invest in an unregulated market ? isn't that illegal ?

    BTW contacted IB-HK live chat support confirmed if they go bust INTERACTIVE BROKERS HONG KONG Ltd will make the claim on your behalf to SIPC.

    Which meand IBHK LTD under the umbrella of IB-LLC is insured by SIPC.

    Last edited by Jalloner54; 14-11-2022 at 06:18 PM.
    Sith likes this.

  9. #109

    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Location
    island east
    Posts
    320
    Quote Originally Posted by Gollygordon:
    Guess you guys should all avoid banks then (Lehmann, Iceland etc). Or asset managers (Madoff et al).

    As I've said elsewhere, real crypto platforms exists literally to remove the trust required for a fraud like FTX to perpetrated. It isn't the asset in the exchange that's the issue, it's the fact that one man can do one he wants in that exchange with no on realising.

    If you disagree, let me know how the Devs of an decentralised perps platform like DyDx would steal user funds (assuming no errors in code, properly audited before us etc)?
    You mean like a supply chain attack?
    Or logic attack against a smart contract?

    https://www.mend.io/resources/blog/p...ccount-hacked/
    https://dydx.exchange/blog/deposit-proxy-post-mortem

    Software at this stage is written by humans and humans make mistakes. The contracts can have their own classes of bugs.

    They have all the problems of securing an internet facing system, with the added frontier of debugging smart contracts. Real world contracts and relationships have lots of vagaries.

    No revocation is a good thing, until you need to revoke, roll-back. Swap code bugs for counter-party risks, etc.

    These folks are learning old school threat modelling, adversary modeling, worse case scenarios, assume breach, assume corrupt insider, assume two corrupt insiders, process modelling, fuzz testing, tou-toc, etc with $m or $b at risk.

    fwiw, worked on a bunch of big-bank dlt integration projects (ripple in 2015/2016), POCs, etc.

    Not saying that there aren't very bright folks in the mix, but i've been involve in payment systems, white-hat, red-team, pen-testiing for years and work on fraud management systems, and worked with the wfh scams, etc. Four eye checks, proces gates, rule change gates, permissions checks, logic checks, manual and automated checking gates, hashing payments, checking for double lodgement, signing messages, key vaults, hsms, real time fraud monitoring, running various forests of anomoly detection algos across data sets,etc. You see old sorts of schemes and scams.

    Used to joke at least our corrupt insiders in the bank didn't kill the clients to get money. Other banks did have tellers that murdered customers...


    ymmv
    TheBrit and Gollygordon like this.

  10. #110
    Quote Originally Posted by jimbo_jones:
    You mean like a supply chain attack?
    Or logic attack against a smart contract?

    https://www.mend.io/resources/blog/p...ccount-hacked/
    https://dydx.exchange/blog/deposit-proxy-post-mortem

    Software at this stage is written by humans and humans make mistakes. The contracts can have their own classes of bugs.

    They have all the problems of securing an internet facing system, with the added frontier of debugging smart contracts. Real world contracts and relationships have lots of vagaries.

    No revocation is a good thing, until you need to revoke, roll-back. Swap code bugs for counter-party risks, etc.

    These folks are learning old school threat modelling, adversary modeling, worse case scenarios, assume breach, assume corrupt insider, assume two corrupt insiders, process modelling, fuzz testing, tou-toc, etc with $m or $b at risk.

    fwiw, worked on a bunch of big-bank dlt integration projects (ripple in 2015/2016), POCs, etc.

    Not saying that there aren't very bright folks in the mix, but i've been involve in payment systems, white-hat, red-team, pen-testiing for years and work on fraud management systems, and worked with the wfh scams, etc. Four eye checks, proces gates, rule change gates, permissions checks, logic checks, manual and automated checking gates, hashing payments, checking for double lodgement, signing messages, key vaults, hsms, real time fraud monitoring, running various forests of anomoly detection algos across data sets,etc. You see old sorts of schemes and scams.

    Used to joke at least our corrupt insiders in the bank didn't kill the clients to get money. Other banks did have tellers that murdered customers...


    ymmv
    These are all fair points, wouldn't really argue with them and I wouldn't suggest that the average person dumps a lot of money into any currently existing contract.

    Absolutely true there is a lot of risk involved in using many smart contracts especially those that haven't been around and battle tested for years. So people using must weight counterparty risk somewhere like FTX (or HSBC, Interactive Brokers etc) with code risk somewhere like DyDx / GMX / Aave.

    Difference is the risk of the latter is firstly auditable and transparent (admittedly not for the average user) and secondly security and contract robustness will improve. At present I would agree that smart contract risk is too high for people to be putting life savings into these contracts, but that won't be the case in 5 or 10 years time. And at that time, these platforms will be far superior to existing structures from both a risk and a cost perspective.

Reply
Page 11 of 21 FirstFirst ... 3 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 19 ... LastLast