SBF hired Mark Cohen

SBF of FTX has hired Mark Cohen as his attorney, per Reuters Cohen recently defended Ghislaine Maxwell in her sex trafficking trial and defended El Chapo prior to that.

Alameda Investments

Sam Bankman-Fried previously said that he only had 100k left in his bank account, but has multi multi millions in real estate. Mark Cohen famously represented numerous high profile clients, most recently Ghisaline Maxwell.

 

Hello Jesus?
Please put your sandals on and come down here immediately.

So he will get prison and We The People will never know who SBF’s “clients” were. I bet Maxwell’s client list, El Chapo’s client list, and SBF’s client list include many of the same bankers, politicians, celebs, and athletes.

Where FTX’s Money Went and the law firms that helped.

Big Law Firm, Sullivan & Cromwell, Did Significant Legal Work for BankruptCrypto Exchange, FTX

 

This Is Where Bankrupt FTX’s Money Went: $74 Million for Caribbean Real
Estate; $59 Million to Politicians; Tens of Millions to Big Law, Celebrity
Endorsements…

 

** NEW BOOK: _A HACKER’S MIND_

[2022.11.11] [https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2022/11/new-book-a-hackers-mind.html] I have a new book coming out in February. It’s about hacking.

_A Hacker’s Mind: How the Powerful Bend Society’s Rules, and How to Bend them Back [https://www.schneier.com/books/a-hackers-mind/]_ isn’t about hacking computer systems; it’s about hacking more general economic, political, and social systems. It generalizes the term _hack_ as a means of subverting a system’s rules in unintended ways.

What sorts of system? Any system of rules, really. Take the tax code, for example. It’s not computer code, but it’s a series of algorithms — supposedly deterministic — that take a bunch of inputs about your income and produce an output that’s the amount of money you owe. This code has vulnerabilities; we call them loopholes. It has exploits; those are tax avoidance strategies. And there is an entire industry of black-hat hackers who exploit vulnerabilities in the tax code: we call them accountants and tax attorneys.

In my conception, a “hack” is something a system permits, but is unanticipated and unwanted by its designers. It’s unplanned: a mistake in the system’s design or coding. It’s subversion, or an exploitation. It’s a cheat — but only sort of. Just as a computer vulnerability can be exploited over the Internet because the code permits it, a tax loophole is “allowed” by the system because it follows the rules, even though it might subvert the intent of those rules.

Once you start thinking of hacking in this way, you’ll start seeing hacks everywhere. You can find hacks in professional sports, in customer reward programs, in financial systems, in politics; in lots of economic, political, and social systems; against our cognitive functions. A curved hockey stick is a hack, and we know the name of the hacker who invented it. Airline frequent-flier mileage runs are a hack. The filibuster was originally a hack, invented by Cato the Younger, A Roman senator in 60 BCE. Hedge funds are full of hacks.

A system is just a set of rules. Or norms, since the “rules” aren’t always formal. And even the best-thought-out sets of rules will be incomplete or inconsistent. It’ll have ambiguities, and things the designers haven’t thought of. As long as there are people who want to subvert the goals of a system, there will be hacks.

I use this framework in _A Hacker’s Mind_ to tease out a lot of why today’s economic, political, and social systems are failing us so badly, and apply what we have learned about hacking defenses in the computer world to those more general hacks. And I end by looking at artificial intelligence, and what will happen when AIs start hacking [https://www.schneier.com/academic/archives/2021/04/the-coming-ai-hackers.html]. Not the problems of hacking AI, which are both ubiquitous and super weird, but what happens when an AI is able to discover new hacks against these more general systems. What happens when AIs find tax loopholes, or loopholes in financial regulations. We have systems in place to deal with these sorts of hacks, but they were invented when hackers were human and reflect the human pace of hack discovery. They won’t be able to withstand an AI finding dozens, or hundreds, of loopholes in financial regulations. We’re simply not ready for the speed, scale, scope, and sophistication of AI hackers.

_A Hacker’s Mind_ is my pandemic book, written in 2020 and 2021. It represents another step in my continuing journey of increasing generalizations. And I really like the cover. It will be published on February 7. It makes an excellent belated holiday gift. Order yours [https://www.schneier.com/books/a-hackers-mind/] today and avoid the rush.

How will Bitcoin /Crypto comply with outdated laws

The Banks own the Feds they own the game.
SEC / CFTC Gary Gensler are all there to protect the Banks.
The Fed won’t update any rules and/or regulations

Bitcoin /Crypto are forced to comply with outdated laws that shouldn’t be the framework.

Sam Bankman-Fried
SBF @SBF_FTX

Right now devs can’t write code in the US without fear of requiring a license they couldn’t possibly get, and you can’t launch a token without fear of prosecution for not completing a registration no one could complete. If the industry argues for no regs this is what we get.

FTX Policy Regulation – Possible Digital Asset Industry Standards

1) As promised: THREAD 1  – 15
My current thoughts on crypto regulation.

2) At a high level:
a) we need regulatory oversight and customer protection
b) we need to ensure an open, free economy, where peer to peer transfers, code, validators, etc. are presumptively free
c) we should establish regulation–and until then standards–to ensure (a/b)

REACTIONS

Sam Bankman-Fried just published his thoughts on the future of regulation in crypto.

It’s structured as a set of self-governing community norms, but it also serves as a suggested framework for regulators to adopt.

Jon Wu Here’s what it recommends: Thread  1 – 7
https://twitter.com/jonwu_/status/1582909696830152705

Maya Zehavi
Given FTX is the bull market winner Sam gets to write the rules & choose which hill to die on.
What’s interesting is that he chose p2p payments & not permissionless smart contracts, where free speech & open crypto sandbox actually proves the tenacity of permissionless.

The reason why crypto needs to be permissionless is to remain a contra to the self dealing in asymmetrical financial info that become the backbone for business as usual in tradfi.
I started out in crypto believing permissionless was a temporary reality till the space matures

But that creating gated moats for crypto where only the incumbents, winners & old boys can play in is detrimental to any prospect of realizing what crypto can shape markets, computation & privacy.
The promise of crypto rails is to serve as leveling infrastructure for data/devs

The FTX proposal is a launch pad for regulatory stamp for “permissioned” DeFi for institutionals to source liquidity off of retail, when liquidity dries up in tradfi markets given the global macro & peak dollar.
The boomerang of incumbent gates is that the US looses innovation

Even the best intentioned projects can’t comply with that, not out of I’ll intent but technically that’s almost impossible when the requirement is to force tradfi market manipulation rules to open permissionless contracts. It’s essentially prohibiting DeFi as we know it

Given the SBF proposal there are 4 actors in the space we should be concerned with :
1. Builders, US smart contract devs & infra
2. DeFi participants – LPs, retail & DAO voters
3. End user conduits – wallets, front end & blockchain data providers
4. The incumbent moats

It’s not just a fancy lawyer talking to the cftc, but a list of measures:
– register w CFTC
– Chief Compliance Officer
– compliance systems to follow rules
– monitor trades
– provide info to CFTC and public
– suspend users who violate rules
– fraud/risk mgmt systems

scott @scott_lew_is
FTX is spending money to push a law thru congress that may force defi protocols to operate like centralized exchanges. The proposal is called the Digital Commodities Consumer Protection Act.
A better name would be the Digital Commodities FTX Protection Act.