Do Kwon converted illicit funds from LUNA to Bitcoin
cointelegraph.com
cointelegraph.com
> What was initially thought to be a market-triggered event turned out to be a clear case of fraud, with former CEO Kwon at the epicenter. According to on-chain data, In the 3 weeks leading up to the depeg of the TerraUSD (UST) stablecoin, one entity dumped over $450 million of UST on the open market. Four days after the last sale, UST started collapsing. The entity behind the massive dump was none other than Terraform Labs.
I assume that if Do Kwon was smarter he would perform transactions more difficult to trace. Not saying that he is not smart but it self-confidence kills many fraudsters.
Do Kwon had virtually unlimited resources for a good plan. My observation from the field (not knowing Kwon but other fraudsters) is that there is an overconfidence based on power. It falls like a house of cards when official prosecutors are involved. It works when everything is handled privately.
Banks are only easier if all entities involved are certain American banks.
If anybody thinks that spending their money on a thing that will give them a "stable yearly APY of 100+" is an investment they are worth being scammed.
There's all these new things in crypto but they still haven't delivered something safe, functional and more reliable than a checking account with an ATM card.
Would be a nice short.
On a side note did all the "big" names collapse already (SBF from FTX, CZ from Binance, Do Kwon)?
It seems to me like you need to be an intelligent creature among other intelligent creatures and to have a theory of mind in order to be a con artist, because cons work by turning someone's intelligence against them.
Eg, organizing to take down a mammoth by forcing it over a cliff isn't so much about outsmarting the mammoth as much as understanding the situation your team is in and what you should be doing. Building traps capable of trapping entire herds[1] involves outsmarting them in a sense, sure, but it also involves coordinating a large construction project.
I've heard the hypothesis that creatures with a highly varied diet need more intelligence to distinguish between poisonous and nonpoisonous food.
If I had to guess, for whatever my speculation is worth, intelligence evolved because we had to be highly cooperative in a rapidly changing environment as the glaciers retreated. And also that animals are much more intelligent than we often credit them for, so it was probably a smaller leap then we might imagine.
I think the role of competition in evolution is often overstated. I don't exactly understand the premise here. The advantage of intelligence was that neighboring communities could swindle each other? Think of it as an iterated prisoner's dilemma, does that strategy make sense?
[1] I think my wording was confusing, reading my comment I do seem to imply that such competition doesn't exist rather than that I thought it was being overstated, but that was sloppy writing on my part.
The question arises in the framework of an evolutionary "arms race", and what feature of the human environment challenges specifically their intelligence, except other humans?
Evolution isn't strictly driven by competition. It isn't reducible to an arms race. If the niche of "intelligent hominid" is a blue ocean, then the evolution can be driven by the vacuum the species is expanding into rather than being pushed by competitive forces. The species does better not because another species does worse, but because they're able to make better use of resources or access resources not previously available.
Competition comes into play more when there is a limiting resource, and the result is generally segmentation, where both species (or presumably hominid communities) adapt in such a way that the resources are divided in a way that meets everyone's needs. When the resource stops being limiting, the competition stops exerting significant pressure.
If evolution was strictly driven by competition, you'd expect instead that species would reliably compete to extinction. But that's actually rare.
See also lek mating:
Since we've made two laps around this point I suspect we'll have to agree to disagree.
Hence the reasoning above that the human intelligence evolved in competition with something that required increased intelligence to overcome; the only such thing on the planet throughout human evolution is other hominids.
Evidently, this is simply a hypothesis, and doesn't exclude other evolutionary pressures.
I’ve always thought of crypto as being the best things for machines to pay for things and one way we can put limits on them.