In any case, the ones who get caught are done in by carelessness, and over-confidence. You have to wonder how many are not getting caught if they can manage these two faults.
I wonder the same about leaks like the Snowden leaks. If Snowden could do this how many other people get access to the same data and use it for their own purposes be it financial, political or both ? My guess is a lot.
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aldrich_Ames
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Hanssen
There may very well be people who are getting away with doing it now, but the leaked data eventually winds up being used which is how you get caught.
2 things that stood out
> Hanssen [...] is serving his sentence at the ADX Florence, a federal supermax prison near Florence, Colorado in solitary confinement for twenty-three hours a day.
The guy made a deal to avoid the death penalty, but from what I've read about solitary confinement this can't be much better.
and this:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aldrich_Ames
>U.S. mole hunters investigated 90 employees at WTC for almost a year and came up with ten suspects, although the lead investigator noted that "there are so many problem personalities that no one stands out"
Now take a highly ranked powerful machiavellian person, and the scenario suddenly seems very likely.
However, it seems like being named in public is the best way to prevent fraud. Many of these scams are through second counsins' friends and weird sources. Now an insider could just go through their best friend and no one would ever be able to connect the dots.
I'm not sure if I'm for or against winners staying anonymous. If they would require public identification, winners could simply change their name to smith. I'd happily change my name for a hundred million dollars.
He gave the tip to his brother. Being able to shield your identity would make fraud both more tempting and less likely to be caught.
HN Discussion Thread [1]
[0] https://highline.huffingtonpost.com/articles/en/lotto-winner...
People were rigging the libor rate to make billions of dollars and nobody was caught for over 20 years
While the LIBOR (and similar) rate had a huge impact given how many products referenced it, the direct trading is rather smaller and the direct impact of misquoting was small. Rates were moved hundredths to at most tenths of a percent.
Using the billions figure is hyperbolic and doesn't reflect what the people involved did or were trying to do.
If you want to fix problems in important markets, just like in code, you need a clear, detailed, and nuanced understanding of what happened and the motivations of those involved.
"On 27 July 2012, the Financial Times published an article by a former trader which stated that Libor manipulation had been common since at least 1991."
In other words, this came to light under the previous US POTUS and - much like the crash of 2007 / 2008 - __nothing__ happened. It's amazing how much power the MSM has over the narrative(s) and public perception.
The point being these financial companies get to operate without fear; without penalty. Which was the nature of the comment that comment was added to.
as opposed to the Russian POTUS :)
The Man Who Cracked the Lottery https://nyti.ms/2Ksihm9
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/.../money-issue-iowa-lot...
it seems many of these cases involve insiders