The smart ones leave an exploit in their smart contracts, exploit it themselves, then blame North Korea

This is known as a "bugdoor".

Wait. Do you regret leaving? Because the fraud works out for some?

May we know what is the industry you are working for? Unless you are selflessly helping homeless animals, everything else is sort of a fraud.

Banking system? Big pharma? Government, God forbid? It's all one huge scam riddled with fraud. It's just framed differently.

That is a weak justification, commonly used by criminals. A liar might say, 'everyone lies'; honest people don't say it. Unless we are engaging in a very philsophical discussion (possible on HN), we don't need to explain the problem in detail.

It's not a "justification" of anything, just a question for someone who blames other people industry as fraud. Just curious about way of thinking, nothing else.

And everyone lies indeed, those who deny it are either delusional or liars. It's human nature.

I didn’t blame an industry as fraud. GP was describing a specific fraud that occurred in an industry. Not the same. I’m sure there are legitimate crypto businesses.

> I’m sure there are legitimate crypto businesses.

I’m increasingly sure there aren’t.

Everyone lies but it's irrelevant when motivating fraud, since not all lies are the same.

Also, not everyone lies with the same frequency. Some do reflexively, some hardly ever, and there's everyting in between.

It's like saying all programmers write buggy code, so they are all the same.

You forgot adtech.

Good point, but my list is by no means full. There is much more areas where fraud and scam is a way of doing things and normalised as such.

That’s why i chuckle at people doing virtue signalling :)

That’s just not true. And a sad view of the world. Profiting isn’t the same a fraud.

Fraud is profiting by deception/illegal means.

Profiting by deception is why marketing even exists tbh. Nobody's plastering ads that outline products in factual unbiased way, it's all just a hair above what the law defines as actual fraud. Except one every so often that deliberately breaks the convention and is often even more likely to be deceptive by fooling people into thinking it's honest.

Name the industry which is not profiting by deception at large?

There’s nothing sad about it. This world is a foul sty, and seeing it through pink eyewear thinking it’s all roses and unicorns - is actually sad.

Because truth inevitably hits everyone.

This attitude seems to follow a very loose definition of the term “fraud” and is likely not what people in this thread mean when they employ the term.

I think you misread that comment, or interpreted it in the worst possible way

Im trying to understand a better interpretation to be honest

> Reminds me of working for MCI-Worldcom. When you think you’re working for crooks, you probably are. Run away.

>> Worked in crypto and I got that vibe so left. Regret it. For every SBF there are hundreds who get away with it. Tons of talentless crypto millionaires still roaming free. Look at the Axie Infinite guys plundering a whole country. Token could collapse, but there’ll be no justice and they’re sitting on at least 8 figures individually

my understanding of this comment:

They worked in crypto, got the feeling they may have been working for crooks, so left and regret being part of it at all. They are upset that many scammers who made millions are still walking around and will face no justice.

vs what I think is a total misreading:

> Wait. Do you regret leaving? Because the fraud works out for some?

There are loads of people who successfully made millions and won't face justice, and they regret leaving before making similar money.

I might have. That’s why I’m asking for clarification.

i think meant "i regret working there"

So you regret not being successful at fraud. Would you put this into an application letter at your next job?

Perhaps don’t put reading comprehension on yours?

Please don't respond to a bad comment by breaking the site guidelines yourself. That only makes things worse.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

"Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith."

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Unless you're in on the schema (and even then!) you'd be the first in line to be the fall guy if things went south

scheme, schema is something to do with your RDBMS

Hah true. Even worse if they are in the schema by having a bool column named "blame X for this"

Lots of comments below criticising this post for "regretting not being a fraud" or some such. Be charitable... the sentence parses just fine as "I regret having worked in crypto".