|
greazeball posted:Go to a bar with a video poker/slot game in the counter. Put a 20 in the machine. Everybody in your group tips the bartender $5 on their first drink. Enjoy refills for $1 tips for as long as you feel like sitting there. Maybe play 4-5 games, then cash out. Not free but will get you a lot of drinks. This is how I used to spend a good portion of DEFCON back when I actually bothered to go. I can only take so much exposure to utilikilts and mohawks before I need a stiff drink.
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2022 00:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 03:55 |
|
|
Pham Nuwen posted:This is how I used to spend a good portion of DEFCON back when I actually bothered to go. I can only take so much exposure to utilikilts and mohawks before I need a stiff drink. I came so close to buying a utilikilt 20 years ago. I'm so very, very glad that I didn't.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2022 00:58
|
|
|
greazeball posted:Go to a bar with a video poker/slot game in the counter. Put a 20 in the machine. Everybody in your group tips the bartender $5 on their first drink. Enjoy refills for $1 tips for as long as you feel like sitting there. Maybe play 4-5 games, then cash out. Not free but will get you a lot of drinks. For the record, it may have worked like this at one point but it's now tracked in most places and you are only getting one drink per x wagered.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2022 01:13
|
|
|
I'm still going to keep sitting at that one stupid blackjack machine in MGM Grand until they finally take it away. It paid for my whole trip last time I went, meals, overpriced tourist margaritas and airfare included. I spent most of the trip working, but it was still pretty nice to go win some poo poo and come back. Video blackjack, single-deck, seven hands (all visible to you at start) vs the dealer, standard rules + 3:2. It's the closest I've seen to free money over there, and I'll be sad when they inevitably decide to gently caress with it or pull it out of service.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2022 02:16
|
|
|
what? they can't possibly have card countable video blackjack?
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2022 02:18
|
|
|
My grandma's favourite casino occasionally does blackjack table promotions where the odds favour a perfect player. I suppose the logic is that drunk people who think they can count cards are a great source of revenue, and it probably helps with repeat business.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2022 02:24
|
|
|
How it started: https://twitter.com/investvoyager/status/1326938475774451712 How it's going: https://twitter.com/Ehrls15/status/1542943887899123718
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2022 02:50
|
|
|
Sundae posted:I'm still going to keep sitting at that one stupid blackjack machine in MGM Grand until they finally take it away. It paid for my whole trip last time I went, meals, overpriced tourist margaritas and airfare included. I spent most of the trip working, but it was still pretty nice to go win some poo poo and come back. drat lol. That sounds like bait.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2022 03:35
|
|
|
Phanatic posted:How it started: So like, if it's supposed to be FDIC insured like a bank account, how is it not illegal to prevent customers from withdrawing their money? Like, it's not as though it's Michael Burry's hedge fund in the big short, doing some kind of black magic CDO buys, it's just a commodity purchase.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2022 04:34
|
|
|
Pham Nuwen posted:This is how I used to spend a good portion of DEFCON back when I actually bothered to go. I can only take so much exposure to utilikilts and mohawks before I need a stiff drink. Darknet Diaries talks about DEFCON a lot in a positive way and I imagine it’s a rose colored glasses situation. If it’s anything like PAX would get tiresome fast.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2022 04:41
|
|
|
Well, you seequote:Customer and Voyager understand that the legal treatment of Cryptocurrency is unsettled and disparate across different jurisdictions. In the event that Customer, Voyager or a Custodian become subject to an insolvency proceeding it is unclear how Customer Cryptocurrency would be treated and what rights Customer would have to such Cryptocurrency And also quote:Customer grants Voyager the right, subject to applicable law, without further notice to Customer, to hold Cryptocurrency held in Customer’s Account in Voyager’s name or in another name, and to pledge, repledge, hypothecate, rehypothecate, sell, lend, stake, arrange for staking, or otherwise transfer or use any amount of such Cryptocurrency, separately or together with other property, with all attendant rights of ownership, and for any period of time and without retaining a like amount of Cryptocurrency, and to use or invest such Cryptocurrency at Customer’s sole risk.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2022 04:44
|
|
|
I am extremely not a finance lawyer, but FDIC coverage presumably doesn’t somehow forbid the bank from failing. It imposes a ton of requirements on the bank that should make it difficult to fail, but if it fails anyway, presumably withdrawals do have to be suspended while the Feds unwind the bank. You just should eventually get your money, from the FDIC if not from the bank. Much more likely, of course, is that the FDIC thing is bullshit, and I assume falsely claiming FDIC coverage is just extraordinarily illegal.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2022 04:51
|
|
|
rjmccall posted:I assume falsely claiming FDIC coverage is just extraordinarily illegal. Maybe the lawmakers just assumed no one would be that dumb. (I kid, I kid.)
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2022 04:57
|
|
|
bob dobbs is dead posted:what? they can't possibly have card countable video blackjack? It certainly seems like it! The rules page on the machine specifies that it is single-deck, says it reshuffles fully between plays (so not quite as countable, but still with 15 visible cards at draw, that's a loving great start), and it certainly plays like it's card-countable. I've made two trips to Vegas now, played that machine both times. The first time, I didn't go as hard in on it as second time, but it still paid for the buffet and drinks. The second trip, I brought $300 to put into it and left with (well, $0 really b/c I paid it back against the trip costs) over $1,000 from it. quote:drat lol. That sounds like bait. It really does! I kept waiting for the other shoe to drop, but it didn't. Third time's the charm?  If any of you are over there, it was in MGM Grand, over near the digital penny slots by the bathrooms. I'm sure that describes like 6 different places, but that's all I can give. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2022 05:02
|
|
|
rjmccall posted:I am extremely not a finance lawyer, but FDIC coverage presumably doesn’t somehow forbid the bank from failing. It imposes a ton of requirements on the bank that should make it difficult to fail, but if it fails anyway, presumably withdrawals do have to be suspended while the Feds unwind the bank. You just should eventually get your money, from the FDIC if not from the bank. I mean... it's banking regs, so I wouldn't go so far as "extraordinarily" illegal. Come on, it's not like they stole some diapers or something.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2022 05:19
|
|
|
FDIC insured banks can and do fail. They just normally do so in a manner that is completely transparent to customers. The Feds come in Friday after close and find a solution that allows opening on Monday with no changes for customers. The sign on the door may or may not change. It's not actually that uncommon for small banks. I'm not sure this is required though as I would expect the situation to take longer if a large bank fails suddenly. As others have said I would bet the crypto firm is lying though.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2022 05:22
|
|
|
No need to lie. This is literally in their customer agreement. https://www.investvoyager.com/useragreement/quote:Cash in the Account is insured up to $250,000 per depositor by the FDIC in the event the Bank fails if specific insurance deposit requirements are met. FDIC insurance does not protect against the failure of Voyager or any Custodian (as defined below) or malfeasance by any Voyager or Custodian employee. Voyager is not a member of the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc. (“FINRA”) or the Securities Investor Protection Corporation (“SIPC”), and therefore Cash is not SIPC-protected.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2022 05:25
|
|
|
Strong Sauce posted:according to this: clark county library has archives of the las vegas sun on microfilm from the 1980s.. not sure if there is a way to go online to search or ask a librarian to access it. there's at least evidence there to be found if they ever printed a newspaper with the headline, "Physicists in Town, Lowest Casino Take Ever" The convention took place in April 1986. And, as you guessed, there's an inkling of truth. There might be more, but there doesn't seem to be any contemporary evidence, at least not currently available. The Las Vegas Review-Journal ran an article previewing the physicists' convention, with the hypothesis that physicists weren't going to be spending much money. Las Vegas Review Journal posted:"The hookers are going broke, the bartenders are going broke and the casino is dead," said Dan Dahlberg, a University of Minnesota physics professor. "We'll probably never be invited back here." The convention was supposed to be in San Diego, but there were scheduling issues. Vegas had cheap rooms. There was concern about scheduling it there, but no more than an eyebrow raised. The reason for the cheap rooms? Easter Sunday was during the convention. A later article said that without the physicists, the MGM Grand would have only been 25% occupied. It was a win-win for both sides. But we don't know the outcome, about how cheap the physicists were. Except for the part about them filling an otherwise empty hotel on a major holiday, the Review Journal didn't follow up with them that month. The full preview from the Review Journal had a couple of the physicists talking that they figured craps had the best odds. One said he had a small limit he was going to spend on roulette, but hadn't been yet. One of the convention's leaders figured some would hit the casinos wanting to test their probability theories. The full Las Vegas Review Journal article is on Genealogy Bank. A shortened version of that AP article can be found freely here: https://books.google.com/books?id=7...0casino&f=false RC and Moon Pie fucked around with this message at 06:12 on Jul 2, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2022 06:10
|
|
|
doingitwrong posted:No need to lie. This is literally in their customer agreement. https://www.investvoyager.com/useragreement/ Yep. I believe the way they did it was to "partner" with an actual bank, but the FDIC insurance covering that bank only applies if that bank itself fails, not Voyager. The whole thing sounds incredibly asinine.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2022 06:58
|
|
|
Vox Nihili posted:Yep. I believe the way they did it was to "partner" with an actual bank, but the FDIC insurance covering that bank only applies if that bank itself fails, not Voyager. The whole thing sounds incredibly asinine. Other places do this too and the FDIC insurance will apply even if they fail because the bank is holding it for you, not for the intermediary company. Claiming FDIC insurance when the money isn't being held in your name and thus fully protected ought to be fraud if that is what's is happening here.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2022 08:21
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/maxfras/status/1542648043463401480
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2022 08:39
|
|
|
In all fairness it says "your USD", so it could be argued that up to 250k customers each get a dollar if it fails.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2022 08:49
|
|
|
RC and Moon Pie posted:The convention took place in April 1986. And, as you guessed, there's an inkling of truth. There might be more, but there doesn't seem to be any contemporary evidence, at least not currently available. so a couple of things here. when this discussion was occurring i was in the middle of packing my bags, waiting for something at work to finish that required me to pay attention half-assedly. so during the idle time i was replying about this. so i probably sounded quite dickish in my replies. so i apologize for sounding like a dick if i did. i don't apologize for the content(?) of the statements i made. but also, to me, a lot of you (royal you, not specifically you the person i'm replying to) seem to look down at people who go to casinos, but have obviously never gone to a casino yourself. which is fine if you don't care for casinos.. but if you haven't, and someone says, "poo poo's made up" it's because none of the story sounds right. let's go over the original post i was indirectly responding to. Chamale posted:The worst financial loss in the history of MGM Casino came when they had 4,000 physicists, mostly grad students, attend a conference there for a week. None of them gambled, and they drank astonishing amounts of free alcohol. i can concede some of the points i'm making might not apply to the 1986 version of vegas, as my experiences of vegas happened post 2000.. so if anybody is 56+ and can describe their experiences... but this statement doesn't pass the smell test for me because of several things. 1: most likely, and again they seem to kinda gloss over this in the APS's retellings, did they actually book rooms for 4000 people at the hotel, or did they just negotiate a discount rate for people attending the conference, then tell the physicists to figure it out themselves (hint: it's the latter. i can't say for sure because they don't say or don't even know the difference, but it was the latter). i was suspicious during the post but just looked it up now and mgm grand/bally's has a capacity of 2100 rooms. so in my mind most likely what happened was they negotiated a discount rate with them, told their attendees.. and that was it. they didn't all squeeze themselves into bally's hotel and cause the casino to "lose" money. 2: "they drank astonishing amounts of free alcohol" ... well what is it: they were so focused on their work that they didn't gamble or they were so plastered they couldn't gamble? also, you can't just get "free" drinks in vegas. that's not how it works if you're a regular person. if you don't believe me, just try and see if you can get even bottled water for free anywhere as a schlub off the street. sure you might be able to find a water fountain but its power is so weak you have to suck on the hole to get water. i mean you probably could if you took it from a waitress and quickly run away since she won't stop you but if you're doing that.. that's not really free. it might be possible to do if you're a complete sociopath who is willing to go to every single waitress ask her for a water, and then not tip her. and forget getting free alcoholic drinks if you're not even sitting. and if you're not putting money on the table or tipping the waitress, they're not going to go back to you to serve you. again my lack of attending casinos in '86 prevents me from being 100% on this, so maybe in '86 this was completely possible to take 10 drinks without gambling, and without getting refused by like the 3rd drink. but the idea that you just get "free drinks" for walking into a casino and doing nothing is not true. i can narrow down that this was true starting in the 90s at least because by then i would go with my parents and i could see nobody was getting "free drinks" okay so maybe the guy's just relaying an apocryphal story and he embellished the story as well. okay. well that's why i said it wasn't true at all. but again let's hypothetically assume APS's version of events. http://physicsbuzz.physicscentral.com/2015/09/one-winning-move.html first off. they don't even get the correct hotel. in 1986 the hotel they got the rate/booking from was called mgm grand, at the end of 1986, it was bought by bally's group and renamed to bally's. the mgm marina.. which when it existed could only hold about 700 rooms was demolished and rebuilt in 1994 and renamed "MGM Grand" and could more than 5000 rooms. the author says, "but the MGM Marina—which stood in the same place—was colloquially known as the Grand." but that's not right at all. this dude obviously did very little effort in researching this, because if you typed something like "mgm grand 1986" most likely google would have returned the wikipedia article on the mgm grand fire in 1980 and if you clicked on that link you could see that the name of the hotel was renamed to bally's (now horseshoe casino but obviously when he could have researched it in 2015 it would have linked to bally's). maybe that sounds like way more effort than any normal person would do, but hey you're a PHYSICIST, aren't you super smart? how come you didn't know this poo poo? to me, it just makes you sound like you don't know what you're saying. next: "It was an unmitigated disaster for the Grand. Financially, it was the worst week they’d ever had. After the conference was over, APS was politely asked never to return—not just by the MGM Grand, but by the entire city of Las Vegas." you know what would be an unmitigated disaster? if they couldn't fill 4000ish rooms with occupants. las vegas hotels generally do not subsidize their hotel rooms, they are not subsidized to get regular people to gamble. not knowing what the rate they gave to the conf attendees, it would not have cost them money for that room at the discount rate. like it's definitely better than them being empty. he does cover this in the post.. but its on the assumption that physicists don't have some kind of profile. i assume back in the 1980s casinos had accountants and actuaries, and i would assume that even if they didn't have a profile on physicists, some random actuary would just stereotype physicists as "lameass nerds who might not gamble too much" and tell them not to give them much discount on the off-chance none of them really do gamble. but even if they knew they wouldn't gamble, it is not uncommon for the casinos to host groups that end up not gambling that much anyways. it is better to take some groups if they're willing to have their conferences during off-season or just putting butts into seats. in general it is a good idea to maintain relationships with groups that can fill up your hotel. do you know what's bad PR? banning an entire organization because they didn't gamble for _one_ weekend. next thing, i honestly don't know if it's even clear to the author who wrote it.. when you go to vegas and you stay at a hotel... you are allowed to go out and go to other casino's to gamble. you don't have to stay at a hotel you rented a room in. you can walk over to the next hotel and check that out. even assuming the physicists all stayed at that hotel and took up all the rooms by doubling up.. it is quite possible that *gasp* tourists from other hotels would stroll in and start gambling. maybe the physicists gambled by walking to other casinos or they stayed at other casinos and gambled there instead. finally, and this is my main reason for being super annoyed at this story, is that the assumption that physicists are too smart to gamble. this is quite possibly the dumbest misconception about why people gamble, that they don't know the odds or are too dumb. i'm sure there are definitely people like that, but people also gamble because it's entertainment for them. people who are addicted might not know gambling odds are bad in general, but they cannot stop themselves... because its an addiction. to me, the whole thing just reeks. a big smarmy condescending tone befit of a physicist society that posts that they "beat" vegas by not gambling. the inkling of truth here is that they attended an event in vegas. maybe they didn't gamble that much. okay. is that actually exceptional to reference? nope. but saying you destroyed a casino by not gambling is more entertaining to say and gets more attention. and everyone saying there's an inkling of truth to me is like saying that tethers are backed by dollars. uh yeah that's kinda true but not really the point. like the writer is making me side with the casino industry here because the writer guy sounds so condescending (while also being wrong). Strong Sauce fucked around with this message at 10:32 on Jul 2, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2022 10:21
|
|
|
Ham Equity posted:I used to work for a financial institution, and failing a phishing test was taken relatively seriously. Like, we didn't fire anyone over it, but they got more than just a "do this online training." We had an outside company come in and do a double-blind phishing test, with a highly targeted email, and our click rate was only about 10%. This is a huge failure on the part of our software industry and firing individual employees for failing to defend themselves against adversaries inside their organisation is absolutely dire behaviour. We hand employees tools that they are required to use to do their jobs like email that are completely unsafe and not fit for purpose, and set their priorities such they have to take these risks to use their jobs, and blame them when they gently caress up when we're deliberately trying to make them gently caress up! SettingSun posted:If my boss had his way, anyone who routinely failed these tests would get canned. At least so far, anyone caught falling for a real one has their job in peril at least. this is ethically up there with firing gas station employees for being robbed IMO
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2022 10:42
|
|
|
Strong Sauce posted:TLDR: read the last 2 paragraphs.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2022 10:54
|
|
|
Dik Hz posted:So you’re saying it’s about ethics in gaming journalism? Reminds me how gaming journalism has been falling over itself to say that Diablo Immortal is in fact a fun and quality game, definitely not pay2win and its monetisation system is entirely fair.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2022 11:34
|
|
|
doingitwrong posted:Well, you see That second one there is worse than it reads. voyager posted:Customer grants Voyager the right, subject to applicable law, without further notice to Customer, to hold Cryptocurrency held in Customer’s Account in Voyager’s name or in another name, and to pledge, repledge, hypothecate, rehypothecate, sell, lend, stake, arrange for staking, or otherwise transfer or use any amount of such Cryptocurrency, separately or together with other property, with all attendant rights of ownership, and for any period of time and without retaining a like amount of Cryptocurrency, and to use or invest such Cryptocurrency at Customer’s sole risk. This is equivalent to giving your crypto to a random person with an empty promise. They can do quite literally anything they want with it including leverage, turning it into collateralized debt, etc. Rehypothecation is the same poo poo as circle, meaning paying one person's interest off by re-leveraging the same money ala USDT. See the one thing USDT was luckily smart enough not to do is to not offer interest on USDT or you would have seen 1T+ marketcap out of USDT before it implodes.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2022 12:54
|
|
|
xiw posted:
Firing gas station employees for getting robbed is wrong because it encourages people to take risks with their own life to discourage robberies. If you get phished at work, the phisher is going after your company and their data. There isn't a ton of personal risk to the employee. In what way are these situations comparable?
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2022 13:06
|
|
|
xiw posted:This is a huge failure on the part of our software industry and firing individual employees for failing to defend themselves against adversaries inside their organisation is absolutely dire behaviour. if your job involves having enough judgment to handle important and expensive things then you probably should have that level of judgment also lol at blaming email for being “completely unsafe and not fit for purpose” you can scam morons over the phone too, as also occurs notwithoutmyanus posted:That second one there is worse than it reads. it reads “you are an unsecured creditor have fun with that”
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2022 13:20
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:if your job involves having enough judgment to handle important and expensive things then you probably should have that level of judgment From getting money back perspective? Of course. From the perspective of...do they even have to retain capabilities of paying back in like currency? No. What's stupid is there are very easy ways to maintain the currency you're given without loving up. Crypto does have deliverable futures and yet people aren't even trying to manage those.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2022 14:00
|
|
|
notwithoutmyanus posted:From getting money back perspective? Of course. From the perspective of...do they even have to retain capabilities of paying back in like currency? No. that’s the point of the unsecured creditor language. you are intended to think this is a bank because it seems like a bank and to trigger the part of your brain that goes “because this is a bank surely it’s regulated and required to be safe”, but it’s not. you are a source of unsecured loans at rates way below what anyone sane would give them, with no security, for the purpose of them using your money to act as a hedge fund, but dumber, so they own the profits and when there’s losses, lol@you
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2022 14:17
|
|
|
This is a boring derail but having attended several APS conferences over the last decade, rooms are indeed usually booked by attendees off a discount rate negotiated by the organisers. Sometimes things like conference dinners, a drinks reception on the opening night, etc are part of the conference fee and a discount on these has been negotiated by the organisers. Often at these receptions they run out of booze quick because yes physicists will always go hard on something they see as being free,but it's not like the venue hasn't calculated how much booze they can provide and still make bank. Physicists will absolutely gamble and are often as dumb as rocks outside of their very specific niche area. The APS story is a famous one and is very likely to be apocryphal, or at least exaggerated in its retelling. The real BWM here is academic conferences in general. Conf fees are extortionate since they're being paid by research grants and everybody takes a cut. Usually if you hit up kayak or Expedia or whatever the room rate will be considerably less than the conference negotiated discount.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2022 15:44
|
|
|
Strong Sauce posted:finally, and this is my main reason for being super annoyed at this story, is that the assumption that physicists are too smart to gamble. this is quite possibly the dumbest misconception about why people gamble, that they don't know the odds or are too dumb. i'm sure there are definitely people like that, but people also gamble because it's entertainment for them. I'm sure that line gives a lot of virality to the story, but my read, having spent a fair amount of time hanging out with the physics crowd in college, wasn't that they were "too smart"; it's that they were too weird. The physicists were lonely but not "lonely"; In 1986 they might have had Internet at work, but it would be slow and limited. Seems like they were so excited to be around other physicists who understood them that they didn't care about the other entertainment offerings, even to the extent that normal "just for fun" gambling that tourists will. Maybe the hotels threw in some "free buffet" vouchers with the bid and that's a draw, but the restaurants back then were not big moneymakers, if at all. The sources closer to the event seem to support this: quote:So were these physicists just too busy sharing their science, seeing presentations and posters, and catching up on homework to find time for the tables? That's one possibility. The fact that a significant portion of the attendees were broke graduate students probably didn't help matters. quote:“All the physicists were much more interested in discussing their work than in anything else the hotel had to offer, and I remember the disconsolate faces of the girls hanging around at night, expecting to take drink orders, while small groups of physicists at the tables were deep in conversation, with pencils and paper,” says Judith Ashcroft, whose husband, Neil Ashcroft, in 1986 was the chair of the society’s Division of Condensed Matter Physics. quote:What happened in 1986 that so resonates in my thinking about these distinctions involved my recognizing a totally and seemingly impossible situation in which I sensed the “madness” (idealism, in particular) associated with March meetings, but, at the same time, I found myself confronted with an equally incredible (and with hindsight, obvious, although I really hadn’t thought of it this way) realization, involving how most people (as opposed to physicists) function. I realized for the first time how physicists function really can appear to be “screwy” (even a little crazy, in comparison to most people). I also began to recognize how much I really admire idealistically motivated science, and the scientists who do it. So realistically, I imagine, you wind up with some pit boss talking to some De Niro analog, "Hey, we got four thousand of these geeks in town, we scheduled all the dealers and waitresses, how come we're not making money?" and they see that as a "loss" because, hey, they feel like they're owed the revenue, same way companies complain about Millennials who don't give them money because their needs and values aren't being met. Maybe in some places they are booking losses, scheduling shifts and maybe even a few shows that would've gotten canceled if they didn't expect four thousand people in town on a normally-slow weekend. Of course lots of lower-level service workers aren't having a good time. This makes it into the gossip stream, a couple local magazines and papers print it (because slow news weeks happen), some of the physicists notice, and when the conference never returns, the story picks up legs until fuzzy memories and third-hand retellings turn it into "Las Vegas's biggest loss ever". e: StarkingBarfish posted:... are often as dumb as rocks outside of their very specific niche area. This also (true of most if not all highly-educated fields I think), hence my firm belief in "not too smart, too weird". Cassius Belli fucked around with this message at 16:37 on Jul 2, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2022 16:31
|
|
|
Strong Sauce posted:TLDR: read the last 2 paragraphs. Thank you for defending the honor of MGM Resorts International on the Something Awful dot com forums, Mr. Bill Hornbuckle.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2022 16:43
|
|
|
learnincurve posted:In all fairness it says "your USD", so it could be argued that up to 250k customers each get a dollar if it fails. I assume "your USD" is insured but roughly 100% of depositors are holding crypto in their accounts, not USD.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2022 16:45
|
|
|
I was having fun following along with this probably fake yet plausible story. A bit of truth, a bit of humor, a bit of mystery. But now we've gooned out and it became way too serious.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2022 16:48
|
|
|
xiw posted:this is ethically up there with firing gas station employees for being robbed IMO More like firing a gas station employee who didn't lock the door while closing down, hung up a sign that said "I'm alone and unarmed and all the cash is out," and told the robber "hey I can open the safe in the back too if you want" while he was already walking out of the store.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2022 16:49
|
|
|
This page needs to be burned and started over again.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2022 16:49
|
|
|
Cerekk posted:I assume "your USD" is insured but roughly 100% of depositors are holding crypto in their accounts, not USD. It's this. Your deposits are held in an FDIC insured account for approximately one hot minute until the exchange turns them into unregulated uninsured shitcoins or some sort of staking or other type of derivative contract. None of your withdrawals are in this account until you've request them and they're drat good an ready to actually send you cash. So while it's plausible that the language they are using is true and correct, it's misleading people into thinking that they are somehow covered with their shitcoins, or potentially even thinking that a "USX<poo poo>" coin they are holding as "cash" in their account is somehow FDIC insured. It's not, it's not even the same "account" at the FDIC insured partner/payment processing bank, the exchange knows this, and they are in no hurry to explain this to anyone.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2022 17:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 03:55 |
|
|
itskage posted:I was having fun following along with this probably fake yet plausible story. A bit of truth, a bit of humor, a bit of mystery. But now we've gooned out and it became way too serious. I'm feeling the same way. Do I believe this story? Not really. But I am SO tempted to empty my 401K to make a movie about it. I bet with the right cast, it would be top 10 on Netflix.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2022 17:11
|
|
