What type of visa does a 20 year old get to start a hedge fund on wall street? I’m really curios, because working on this is my dream but I’m stuck as an L1 engineer at faang instead :(. I worked really hard to get here but I really wish I could do something like this (legitimately) instead.
(1) because you're hoping to know how a 20-something year-old led millions of dollars' worth of scams, to... emulate it?
(2) because you feel stuck as somebody working at a FAANG (I know it might just be another wednesday for some HN users but I'll remind them that faang work still remains the 1% for the plebs not graced by "that" touch)
There are ways to find inspiring leaders that don't involve them spending nearly a decade in prison. For one, thorough discussion with interesting people (people you deem interesting probably are, you made it to a faang) of all ages (success in youth is lovely but unless you bet on chance being on your side you might want to broaden your horizons), and accepting that leadership takes many shapes - not just the ones that make the bad kinds of headlines.
I'm not your target audience though, and probably just ruminating helplessly as an answer to your message fishing for future investors - apologies.
He is from Australia, so they have access to the E-3 visa [0], which is a lot easier to get than most of the others. That is not to say that it is the visa he is on, I just wanted to highlight the possibility.
> is a 24-year old Australian national. According to its public marketing materials, Virgil Sigma has been profitable in every month from August 2016 to the present
So 24 now, in 2017 investors gave a 100mil to invest in crypto on the say so of a 19 year old who said they make money every month. Honestly not sure who the is the bigger bad guy in all this, the scammer or the scammed.
At this point Ethereum has a bunch of applications on top with quite a bit of demand, and you need ETH to pay the transaction fees, a portion of which are burned. Once proof-of-work is discarded early next year, the supply will start shrinking, and it'll be possible to value ETH like shares in a company doing stock buybacks. So I'd say that doesn't look much like a Ponzi scheme.
"The only winning move is not to play". I guess you might miss out on something, or miss out on making a tidy profit off a Greater Fool, but the peace of mind is worth it.
A Ponzi scheme requires creators/beneficiants to actively work on inviting new people by the virtue of simple advertisement. Most of creators/beneficiants of widely used cryptocurrencies do not do that.
Ponzi schemes require returns, and more specifically the source these returns being the newly invested funds rather than actual trading/investing activity that becomes the scam.
A crypto security on its own doesn't guarantee or promise returns, and gaining value because of other people buying in is no different than company stock also rising in price because of demand. That's just how trading works. The potential issue is if people bought in because of misleading or false details rather than public information.
> By definition, Ponzi scheme’s, like musical chairs, do work as long as people keep playing.
This is not correct. You have to maintain a very particular ratio of new investments to redemptions in order for a Ponzi scheme to be stable. (The amount of money invested in a given period must equal or exceed the amount of money redeemed.) If that doesn't happen, which will almost always be true, you will flame out despite the fact that people are still playing.
Crypto is a catch-all term at the moment. Some cryptos will be more useful than others. Some (like BTC) could be the digital equivalent of gold. Some will facilitate decentralized companies (e.g. LINK). Some will likely be Ponzi schemes (e.g. dogecoin).
The problem with this is that even a well meaning and useful piece of technology will be called a scam and ponzi if they have a coin. Look at the layer one chains, ETH, SOL and AVAX. Are these ponzis?
1. if you're making 600% annualized you don't take outside investors, you prop trade for your own account.
2. He's very young and didn't have any trading pedigree: normally you would expect someone like this to be ex-js/citsec/etc
3. Sometimes lavish life style can be a give away: often the real rain makers are pretty frugal.
4. Related to 2, but if you're gonna take outside investors for some reason and you're printing like that, you sure as hell aren't gonna take it from random individual. You would raise money from one or a couple big firms or possibly a ultra hnw individual.
I've been beating the market for a few years now (not 600% annualized of course). It's harder to find capital than you think it is. But, then again, I guess you're right. In order to consistently beat the market I've focused on beating the market and not trying to raise funds, so maybe that's why I've been able to do it. Kind of a catch-22.
I was the other person profiled in the WSJ article they referenced. I remember when the article came out and I was like, "wow those are some impressive returns."
Sad to see that he was stealing. I think we will see more of these cases. There was a ton of very "shady" behavior in the industry. Regulators are only scratching at the surface.
> in February 2018, QIN and his fund were profiled in the Wall Street Journal.
Sad that the financial press didn't smell a rat. I suppose if they were that savvy, they'd be making money on the street rather than working as journalists :-/
The scammers get more creative every day. What I want to know is how an individual can be certain their crypto is safe? And how does one get their money back?
To be totally safe you need to hold in 'cold storage,' totally offline. Unless the feds intercept someone in the act of scamming/stealing crypto and negotiate the crypto back into your hands, it's incredibly unlikely you will ever get your money back.
Interactive Brokers just announced they are going to start trading crypto. If they trade it like stocks, then they hold the crypto for you. This would make it as safe as them holding the stocks in your brokerage account.
What happens if Hypothetically he has those $54mm He was ordered to pay back in a properly hid zcash wallet and he says he just gambled them away / lost the keys?
> QIN, 24, was also sentenced to three years of supervised release, and ordered to forfeit $54,793,532.
Geeze, so crime does pay as it is likely he's keeping some of the money he made by using the stolen money to invest in other things such as real estate, or some BTC / ETH he was able to hide from investigators
So he probably has some blue-chip cryptocurrency (BTC, ETH, etc.) hidden away. 24 years + 7 years prison = He will be 31 years old when he is out, and likely a millionaire with that hidden cryptocurrency, at today's prices, and likely a billionaire if cryptocurrency price rises keep similar returns to previous years.
[Insert obligatory acknowledgement of my privilege], but I like to think I wouldn't have sold my mid to late 20s for a couple of billion USD, given the choice.
It would make a great "American Greed" episode. He got lucky, 7 years is rather on the low end. Usually for running a ponzi scheme this big in the US you get at least 15 years.
[+] [-] thegypsyking|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] shapefrog|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] cmehdy|4 years ago|reply
(1) because you're hoping to know how a 20-something year-old led millions of dollars' worth of scams, to... emulate it?
(2) because you feel stuck as somebody working at a FAANG (I know it might just be another wednesday for some HN users but I'll remind them that faang work still remains the 1% for the plebs not graced by "that" touch)
There are ways to find inspiring leaders that don't involve them spending nearly a decade in prison. For one, thorough discussion with interesting people (people you deem interesting probably are, you made it to a faang) of all ages (success in youth is lovely but unless you bet on chance being on your side you might want to broaden your horizons), and accepting that leadership takes many shapes - not just the ones that make the bad kinds of headlines.
I'm not your target audience though, and probably just ruminating helplessly as an answer to your message fishing for future investors - apologies.
[+] [-] Ballas|4 years ago|reply
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E-3_visa
[+] [-] noloblo|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] asadlionpk|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] shapefrog|4 years ago|reply
So 24 now, in 2017 investors gave a 100mil to invest in crypto on the say so of a 19 year old who said they make money every month. Honestly not sure who the is the bigger bad guy in all this, the scammer or the scammed.
[+] [-] H8crilA|4 years ago|reply
(I hate scammers like this guy, but the comparison is valid, I think)
[+] [-] mensetmanusman|4 years ago|reply
By definition, Ponzi scheme’s, like musical chairs, do work as long as people keep playing.
[+] [-] DennisP|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] davidw|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] lostmsu|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tzm|4 years ago|reply
A shared heuristic, not a definition. You pretty much defined economic participation or confidence in any monetary system (applicable to all markets).
[+] [-] manigandham|4 years ago|reply
A crypto security on its own doesn't guarantee or promise returns, and gaining value because of other people buying in is no different than company stock also rising in price because of demand. That's just how trading works. The potential issue is if people bought in because of misleading or false details rather than public information.
[+] [-] thaumasiotes|4 years ago|reply
This is not correct. You have to maintain a very particular ratio of new investments to redemptions in order for a Ponzi scheme to be stable. (The amount of money invested in a given period must equal or exceed the amount of money redeemed.) If that doesn't happen, which will almost always be true, you will flame out despite the fact that people are still playing.
[+] [-] sentinel|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] phaemon|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ryanSrich|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] smabie|4 years ago|reply
1. if you're making 600% annualized you don't take outside investors, you prop trade for your own account.
2. He's very young and didn't have any trading pedigree: normally you would expect someone like this to be ex-js/citsec/etc
3. Sometimes lavish life style can be a give away: often the real rain makers are pretty frugal.
4. Related to 2, but if you're gonna take outside investors for some reason and you're printing like that, you sure as hell aren't gonna take it from random individual. You would raise money from one or a couple big firms or possibly a ultra hnw individual.
[+] [-] mmmmkay|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] aml183|4 years ago|reply
Sad to see that he was stealing. I think we will see more of these cases. There was a ton of very "shady" behavior in the industry. Regulators are only scratching at the surface.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/bitcoins-crashing-that-wont-sto...
[+] [-] WalterBright|4 years ago|reply
Sad that the financial press didn't smell a rat. I suppose if they were that savvy, they'd be making money on the street rather than working as journalists :-/
[+] [-] mhh__|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ProjectArcturis|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] p1necone|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] croes|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] smabie|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ScottMann|4 years ago|reply
That is my biggest concern with my crypto wallet.
[+] [-] AQuantized|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] WalterBright|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ryanSrich|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] eaenki|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] shapefrog|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] syspec|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] nobrains|4 years ago|reply
He wins.
[+] [-] mths|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] janmo|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ljm|4 years ago|reply
Maybe if he put the money into cheap mortgages and loans he'd get a government bailout instead. Play the game like the big guys do.
(The point being, you grow to be less accountable)
[+] [-] paulgb|4 years ago|reply
References to Two Sigma and AQR, I guess?
[+] [-] stevespang|4 years ago|reply
[deleted]