Because my mother taught me that 100% of my value as a person is being a home owner because that's the only thing that matters. Not even a condo will do.
Agreed. A date = two people spending some time getting to know each other to see if there is romantic (or sexual) compatibility. Don't need to read to far into it.
Hire fast / fire fast has worked for some relatively lean teams that I've been on, but I can see it being hard to implement at mid-size and bigger companies where there's all kinds of red tape.
The real problem is still the moral one they indicated. If someone leaves a stable job where they perform adequately and you fire them from the new one, you've removed their source of income and probably healthcare. With no knowledge of who they're supporting or what resources they have access to, this could be a very damaging thing to do.
If you limit your hiring only to people whose resources can handle that risk, you're limiting your pool to only financially stable individuals who don't have eg a child or spouse with an expensive medical condition.
Morally treacherous territory either way in the absence of a trustworthy economic safety net that the US absolutely doesn't have.
I understand where you're coming from, but I don't see how that's the employer's problem. This risk is ALWAYS there when taking on a new job. Fire fast doesn't really mean one week either, but it can be evident in the first 2-3 months if someone is a bad fit.
So crypto is fine for transactions that I can wait a few tens of minutes to a few hours to resolve, but not ones that I want to make at the rate of every fiat currency I hold.
I can see how other people would have that use-case.
You do understand that proof of stake has absolutely nothing to do with transaction speed or fees -- speed depends on how many nodes you want to agree on any transaction (decentralization) while the fees depend on how congested the network gets in an open pricing model for fees?
Unless you are a crypto expert in it for the technology, that you happened to learn from random shiller YouTube videos.
Exchanges allow for sub-second resolution of a transaction because the resolution is actually pushing numbers around in the exchange's own internal tables (or between trusted exchanges). Banks offer similar service when trading fiat currency (either because they can resolve an internal account-to-account transaction or because they'll float the risk of fraud until they can resolve a cross-firm transaction). But if you want to have the Bitcoin network agree on a transaction, it has to get buried several blocks deep in the chain, and that takes time.
Ah, yes I don't disagree. IMO, I don't think the use case for crypto is to replace fiat, but I can see how those that operate from that assumption/desire would experience friction.
No, and he's not being charged with "insider trading" (because it doesn't exist for art / collectibles). Typically any item that hits the OpenSea front page has already been listed (usually days or weeks later). The listing of the most popular NFTs occurs when their custom smart contract goes live on-chain, and is usually accompanied with a custom "mint" website. OpenSea automatically lists any ERC721 that gets created (although will sometimes manually de-list projects for copyright violations or other issues).
He definitely took advantage of privileged information. He definitely should have been fired and fined. But these are not securities. NFT art drops do not have "earnings calls" and quarterly reports or anything of the sort.
He was front running the boost in sales activity that occurs when a project gets featured on the front page of OpenSea.io. That's the extent of it.
IMO, I think the way he was publicly lambasted and fired was punishment enough. Not to mention that shortly after, people were calling for him to return to OpenSea, because they were struggling without him for a hot minute.
I agree what he did was stupid and wrong, but I think he's the wrong person for the DOJ to throw the book at. They are only targeting him, because this was low hanging fruit due to the public outcry around this incident.
Disagree with most of this. It couldn't be more clearly textbook insider trading. He wouldn't have bought the NFTs and then immediately sold them for 5x profits if he didn't know OpenSea would be featuring them.
>I think he's the wrong person for the DOJ to throw the book at
Who cares if other people have done worse? When you break the law you should face consequences.
our realization is that we don't really have laws to cover this. insider trading is exclusively a securities law violation, which requires securities to have been traded. the NFTs in question are not securities and the actions around them are not being prosecuted as such. the remaining laws the prosecutors came up with are such a stretch that it seems like a waste of public resources, although "wire fraud" is sufficiently broad enough it may still be either kind of weak, or, not the expansion we want.
Case in point, "wire fraud" is typically a tacked on charge, in addition to another charge. and "money laundering" is also a tacked on charge, that requires an illicit origin, not just the action of obfuscation or movement of money. So they have to tie a couple things together solely because "we don't like what happened", but it may be the wrong authority to deal consequence.
It has nothing to do with a public understanding or a legal understanding of insider trading, because that's not what he was charged with, despite his trades being the catalyst for this indictment. semantics, but relevant semantics. you can insider trade everything except securities. you can have a market advantage on spot commodities, real estate, trading cards, you name it. but yes its typically a form of fraud when you can be proven to have created more demand than was really there + trading on that + when your employer has entrusted you not to do that. there are many circumstances where this would all be a non-case.
Not really, they're making an example out of some guy that made an opportunistic bad decision, but meanwhile there are criminals defrauding people of a lot of money in the NFT space and are allowed to operate in the open.
