Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by cycrutchfield 2991 days ago
And that is an entirely separate issue that has nothing to do with the fraud ongoing in cryptocurrencies.
3 comments

No it's not. I think you are perhaps intentionally being a bit obtuse to make a point, but you are better off just coming out and stating your beliefs.

In this case: major finance players are top dogs in Albany politics (along with other FIRE economy and pharma). Their input most certainly has influenced and is influencing both investigations (or lack thereof) into criminal activity in big banks and other financial institutions, as well as into crypto-blockchain tech.

Some big players probably want more robust assurance that their crypto assets are protected. Others probably want to create pain in the space either because they hold a short position or because they have fear of losing their regulatory capture.

But acting like there is no relationship between the (absence of meaningful) investigations into NY finance and this news is unhelpful.

What's unhelpful is baseless speculation about conspiracies and corruption. You're the one making the accusations, you don't get to criticize others asking about them.
JP Morgan was recently sued for defrauding cryptocurrency buyers. We can be assured the corruption is intertwined.
Clearly the AG of NY has motivations and interest to protect fiat / legacy banking systems, let's not pretend otherwise.
> Clearly the AG of NY has motivations and interest to protect fiat / legacy banking systems

Attorney General Schneiderman fined Goldman Sachs and other banks over $5 billion [1]. "Clearly" indeed...

[1] https://ag.ny.gov/press-release/ag-schneiderman-led-state-fe...

> Clearly

The burden of proof is on you to demonstrate that Schneiderman is acting here to protect the banking system and not acting to protect his constituents from being defrauded.

Proof is obviously just another trick by the statist stooges conspiring to hold back cryptocurrencies.
Don't need proof if you've got proof of work...
He has motivation to protect the legacy banking system and all unenumerated motivations as well.
Then it should be trivial for you to provide proof of this accusation.
What part of "burden of proof" do you not understand?
Believe whatever you want