An ex-colleague of mine worked for OneCoin (another crypto scam originating from Bulgaria) when their offices got raided a few years ago. Now he’s an engineering manager at Nexo.
I can see a pattern emerging in his career.
I can see a pattern emerging in his career.
That said, I’ve had nothing but bad experiences with cryptocurrency obsessed hires and peers in the workplace. This got especially bad in 2022 when people’s portfolios were up and they all believed they were on the verge of retiring wealthy. There’s something about buying into the crypto dream that makes people think they’ve found a cheat code to financial freedom while the rest of us are stupidly working our jobs.
I’ve watched the same exact pattern play out with coworkers who bought into MLM schemes or self-help guru courses. These fantasies about breaking free from the world through “secret” financial instruments will always be attractive to some subset of people.
> Willing to be paid in strange currencies deposited in overseas banks.
I'd need a more concrete definition for 'strange currencies', but discriminatory behaviour shouldn't be applied to anyone that has an account overseas, especially in the age of global banking & cross-border payments.
> Likely to have tax troubles one day.
On the one hand, this will definitely happen: Internationally-acquired income often subsequently leads to poor tax handling, especially if the individual involved is unfamiliar with the intricacies of filing taxes for such sources of income.
However, it is also a consequence of overlapping jurisdictions & law enforcement, with unified, clear & unambiguous definitions being the exception rather than the norm.
> Knows how to buy a plane ticket using cash.
Why is using cash a problematic behaviour now? Just because I still use cash doesn't mean that I should be classified as 'shady'.
> Strong opinions on Krugerrand valuation.
Tried to search this & only found references to the gold coin with the same name. As similarly stated beforehand, why is being a goldbug now 'shady'?
> Owns a motorcycle without an odometer.
...I can see why: An odometer, coupled with the motorcycle's purchase histories, is a good way of finding out the roads that a person used to travel on with some reliability.
> Bought a house with a series of 9,999$ travelers checks.
Same as the plane ticket: The large denomination will raise eyebrows, but it shouldn't be used as a marker for discrimination.
> More likely to install a Kim Dotcom-type panic room than run for public office.
...This is similar to the odometer-less motorcycle: The individual wanting to install a panic room is likely someone that's thinking about worst case scenarios, & planning with that in mind.
------
All of the listed "shady" traits stem from a core: Paranoia, specifically paranoia of a malicious State. More generally, it's the fear that the State will use the information it gathered about a person for unwarranted surveillance & eventually prosecution over the slightest infractions.
In earnest: Why is paranoia suddenly a "shady" thing?
Even still, it is easily hacked on almost any vehicle (Tesla is a great example of a connected car making it much harder) and there is plenty of YT all about it...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hfPm-9p0YUI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1MFd7Ufe7v4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8wygJwWnFm4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Q_AMBBNk2A
When I was living in Vietnam, I could pay someone about $5 to do it for me.
What I learned pretty quickly was that the ODO is the last thing I'd rely on for price.
I think this is easier with bikes because there's more repair culture and more off-roading. Off-road bikes generally have all non-essentials stripped and left in a box, blinkers, odometer, fancy fenders...
Picower may have figured out it was a Ponzi and agreed to "invest" in the scheme when Madoff became desperate for liquidity. But there was plausible deniability as he was just a guy who bought in at times and sold off at others.
So maybe the actual trick is people like Picower, who identify these schemes and then leverage the scheme to their advantage while all along looking like another victim and never once speaking about their suspicions or getting involved in the mechanics. Which brings me to think perhaps the Picowers in SBF's scheme were some of his investors who figured out it was a scheme but believed they could cash out before it toppled.
We don’t typically count it against employees for future hiring when that happens though.