> We quantify the wash trading on each unregulated exchange, which averaged over 70% of the reported volume.
Coinbase isn’t one of the unregulated exchanges.
Coinbase isn’t one of the unregulated exchanges.
> The order also finds that over a six-week period—August through September 2016—a former Coinbase employee used a manipulative or deceptive device by intentionally placing buy and sell orders in the Litecoin/Bitcoin trading pair on GDAX that matched each other as wash trades. This created the misleading appearance of liquidity and trading interest in Litecoin.
https://www.cftc.gov/PressRoom/PressReleases/8369-21
I wouldn’t be surprised if the wash trading on these unregulated exchanges followed a similar pattern where insiders were largely using the system to their advantage and using their insider knowledge or connections to (try to) hide it.
Given the volume of trading that happens on unregulated exchanges, I don’t see why anyone would think the amount of fraud has been decreasing as unregulated activity is increasing.
> Our data cover the period from 00:00 July 09th, 2019 (when TokenInsight started to collect transaction information from these exchanges) to 23:59 November 03rd, 2019 (the time we wrote the first draft).
Sometimes it's nice for the title to honestly represent what the paper/blog/whatever is about without having to dive into the abstract.
I think there might even be some word for having titles which somewhat misrepresent the piece in question, often used when the title elicits more clicks by leaving out a key piece of information.
It's just the altered title for the HN submission that is actively misleading.