Readit NewsCan iOS/Android apps be updated without 3rd party approval?
Edit: It is rumored that SBF is en-route to Argentina
Second Edit: This is a Twitter rumor, with no verification, could be fake news. I was going to paste the Tweet, but the Tweet has been removed because it was seen as unlikely.
a. Bankman-Fried and associates
b. insiders (disgruntled)
c. outsiders (hackers)
2. Is it plausible that the transferred funds be laundered?
3. Can this altruism get any more effective?
This story is utterly fascinating. It keeps getting better and better. I remember thinking Mt. Gox was wild. This fraud is second only to Ponzi.
My particular views are: https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/EKN9Nn89ixriwSXpP/...
Bankrupt positions were usually sold for 1% under market price to backstops, so if mobile coin traded at 60 dollars and trader goes bankrupt, Alameda bought the position for 59.4 dollars per mobile coin (what a sweet deal!). The trade is done for trader. I am not convinced that if you go bankrupt, because you bought some GME at $120, you can go after the counter party who sold you GME at that price. (You can try, but it's some bad faith stuff).
This trade underlines again why the commodities exchange act is so vital to the whole country, and shows just how crappy FTX liquidation model is. [1]
Also, I really like trade because it's smart and funny.
[1] CME Group CEO Terrence Duffy said it too! Here: https://youtu.be/V4SWraem1e0?t=2963
It seems to me that whomever was making these trades knew (suspected/or had actual inside operational information-but possibly from prior trades) that Alameda would buy the position and he would not be liable for the subsequent deflation of price.
If you knew that Alameda were going to backstop at 1% under the market price, this seems like an obvious trade to make. But how would you know that Alameda were going to do that without inside information?