Re:Uber Paid Hackers to Delete Stolen Data on 57M People
by adamiscool8 on Tuesday November 21, 2017 @06:58PM
(#15752906)
Parent might be conflating the amount actually found to be laundered with HSBC's failure to monitor over $200 trillion [1] in suspicious transactions.
[1] https://www.theglobeandmail.com/incoming/article6209613.ece/...
Re:Uber Paid Hackers to Delete Stolen Data on 57M People
by gleenn on Tuesday November 21, 2017 @06:35PM
(#15752752)
Isn't that 0.881 billion? They're still off by 3 orders of magnitude
Re:Uber Paid Hackers to Delete Stolen Data on 57M People
by kelnos on Tuesday November 21, 2017 @06:42PM
(#15752805)
> So 0.88 Tn.
You mean 0.00088 Tn.
Re:Uber Paid Hackers to Delete Stolen Data on 57M People
by colejohnson66 on Tuesday November 21, 2017 @07:53PM
(#15753229)
Well, itβs 0.88 percent of a trillion...
While "trillions" is definitely inflated and hyperbole, I don't think it's THAT far off.
According to this The Guardian article [0] "At least $881m in drug trafficking money was laundered throughout the bank's accounts."
So 0.88 Tn. Definitely not "trillions" but definitely much more than I would've expected if they said "billions laundered".
Also, it says "at least", which I take it to say that the investigation was not complete so a final number couldn't be calculated and only a "lower" cap is given. Potentially it could still be "trillions" as in e.g. "1.3 trillions" (if that final figure is ever calculated or even published of course). So inflated, yes. Hilarious... not so sure.
[0] https://www.theguardian.com/business/2012/dec/11/hsbc-bank-u...