lol what this nonsense. tether's regarded as the safest bc their biz model is providing entities usdt for usd without offering interest on the cash.

now why would any entities want to deposit usd into a private bank and receive usdt without any yield on their cash? you think you understand tether so well maybe think about it for a few minutes

payments is a meme for every bagholder coping about their cheap blockspace chain. literally every cycle cheap l1's come up

eth mainnet is lindy as the most secure settlement/data availability layer, other layers for execution settling back to mainnet or other da layers potentially solve settlement fee/l1 data writing rent issues

the funniest part about FTX was how utterly awful it was. books were thin, and everyone knew alameda was hunting customers in the books, while listing perps for their farm and dump investments. really just a sham of an exchange/casino, so around average by crypto standards, but KOLs and mainstream comms praised them.

> KOLs and mainstream comms praised them

I know this will just get me labelled a conspiracy theorist but I refuse to believe his well-connected parents had nothing to do with the praise FTX received in the mainstream media.

Sequoia led their one of their rounds, everyone assumed sequoia did enough due diligence, everyone goes in and fills the round; it's assumed its a trustworthy platform for retail

That's exactly how most funds operate. They don't want to spend the time and money to do due diligence so they just wait around for one of the bigger funds to supposedly do the due diligence. So if they see them invest, they will join the round. it's so much easier to fill out a round one you get your first big VC on board.

I honestly feel Sequoia should be held partially responsible for funding and marketing such a blatant criminal enterprise. I'm a little tired of these venture capitalists claiming all innonence when they should have a burden of responsibility. They want all the upsides and none of the downsides to throwing millions at people.

Yeah try talking with a VC while you play videogames and see where it leads you

But since it was the "wonder kid of crypto" (read, very well connected person) it was a reason for praise

Yes please explain me how he really merited that

They could be held partially responsible as they could have their fund LPs sue them for negligence, especially if they had any materials detailing that they did diligence.

They won’t be though, because everyone would be afraid for future repercussions. That said, they’re on a list of VC firms I would hesitate to take calls from going forward.

Plus VC get the most insane tax break, ability to roll over some percent of their gains tax free into perpetuity until they withdraw, the withdrawal gets taxed. I understand that helps compensate for risk, but it also means they can swing at the fence with FTX and that microfluidics scam Elizabeth Holmes.

>They want all the upsides and none of the downsides to throwing millions at people.

I see what you're getting at, but this is a bit of a silly statement. The obvious downside of "throwing millions at people" is that you lose millions of dollars.

It's not a right to have a guaranteed return on an investment. It isn't silly at all. They literally only want a single downside (losing their initial investment), absolving themselves of all responsibility for their investments while retaining maximum return in the event such a return on investment happens. They will also do everything they can, a la various modes of propaganda, to manipulate avoiding that single downside as well.

The startup culture that has fetishized making it big at all costs (move fast and break things) has lead to customer (and non-customer) deaths amongst several other massive failures. The investors should have some responsibility and accountability assigned. Right now, they have zero.

We punish banks for failing to do proper KYC even when they're also victims of fraud.

> You are basically suggesting that a fraud victim should be punished more than the money they lost

Their actions brought in more victims, and therefore investors ought to be wary of listening to them in future. They ought to be also punished by a hit to their reputation i.e. by being held partially responsible.

They didn't "bring" in more victims, more victims joined in because they were lazy, just like most of the VC industry.

> more victims joined in because they were lazy...

They were lazy because they relied on the reputation of who was pushing for FTX, now their reputations won't be so rock solid. That's some justice.

It's a bit strong to call Sequoia "fraud victims". They were at a minimum incompetent and at a maximum intentionally misleading to other investors. You shouldn't write an article like this (https://archive.ph/GQkCp) unless you have done your research. Did they do literally any due diligence prior to leading a massive investment round?

Just because they stand to lose millions doesn't excuse their responsibility and influence. Venture capitalists have no one to blame but themselves for the risky companies out there. They are effectively snake oil salesmen, just looking to siphon off relatively short-term profits under the guise of "changing the world".

Isn't it a bigger indictment of the "follower" investors who did no due diligence of their own because Sequoia was investing? Why would anyone trust their money with these investors instead of investing with Sequoia if that's all they do?

In my opinion, it's all of the above.

Instagram's CEO actually talks about this movement from public engagement to private groups, stories/dms in a podcast, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OHIsVfdqg74

Very noticeable trend as after the explosion of IG around 2017, a lot of convos went to from fb messenger to ig group/telegram/discord/signal and obviously whatsapp

Personally seeing posting to the main feed as being too extra, usually someone trying to sell something, instagram being too full of ads/irrelevant info or bait at the worst... which I guess you could say is the same for most of the big public websites

wait until public pension funds realize they are financing the decay of rail conditions thru private equity investments

now go further down this line of thinking... how those with status and money must view the world as nothing more than theatrics. airport security theatre being the most obvious

VR doesn't need to capture the average facebook user/masses. As long as META can retain devs/early adopters, with great hardware, the ecosystem/community has already been built. High ROI is only inevitable, whales in MMORPG's spend the money because theres a genuine connection with the players/community, that should've become apparent to everyone with NFTs/crypto.

If Zucc's bets on acquiring whatsapp and instagram were plays on time spent/attention, should track that he understands the killer app of VR is going to be time spent/attention. VR isnt just a new medium to tell stories, if it taps into something more primal than anything a screen can convey, then the "next platform" race has already started and META is ahead by leagues

VR absolutely needs to capture the average FB user and the masses. Zuck is not building the new WoW or an NFT marketplace. His goal is to create a highly social, highly monetizable, work/play platform for the planet.

> that should've become apparent to everyone with NFTs/crypto

Right, that's why FB, Meta and its metaverse are so highly regarded in the crypto community.

Is the plan actually VR, or to use it as a stepping stone to AR?

obviously someone in the group hates your wife and is reporting all her posts for nudity lmao

As most internet natives know, the longer a thread goes on the more likely a flamewar erupts; pour gasoline on that with the addition of clout/followers/engagement to grow a brand, and you get an especially unhealthy reward loop