Chief executive of collapsed crypto fund Hyperverse does not appear to exist | Hacker News Reader

Chief executive of collapsed crypto fund Hyperverse does not appear to exist

theguardian.com

91 pointsCaptainZapp70 comments

The first giveaway that this is a scam (beyond the Chuck Norris 'celebrity' endorsement) is that a GS exec of any competence wouldn't be wasting time chasing the crowdfunded civilian dollar while ZIRP money was flying around the usual traditional finance channels (pension fund, PE and HF investments).

The wildest part of this article is the part about the successor scam, which was touted by masked, pseudonymous representatives - and people willingly gave them their money! Boggles the mind.

There’s also an equally wild article linked in a sidebar about one of the victims who got scammed out of $30k, but then kept sending good money after bad trying to recoup her losses.

Some recovery companies will take your money again, loosing money online is very common in our days, I was a victim of investment scam. I contacted several recovery companies online..it was all tragic story. I didn’t tell my wife I invested online but at that point I couldn’t hold it. I told my wife and believe me she was the solution to my problem..Her friend had same problem and have someone who helped her figure it out..At first I thought it was all going to be crap as always, but to my greatest surprise it was a job well done. I wouldn’t have believed if someone told me because of my experience with different recovery companies with series of unfulfilled promises. Now I’m convinced from experience. I recommend: recoverydarek@gmail.com to anyone in need of similar help. They are real and legit.

This email address and blurb seems to have been spammed on things as diverse as a wine blog and an obituary, anywhere they can shove it with little oversight.

No, they are not legit. No, they cannot recover your money from scammers. Yes, this is just another scam and it's right here in plain sight on hacker news.

In the next installment, the representatives will not only wear masks but also striped prisoner suits like the Daltons in Lucky Luke. And people will still give them money.

Have your bitcoins or cryptocurrency been stolen from your wallet, or have you invested in a bogus crypto investment organization that turns out to be a scam? If so, I have some excellent news for you. I initially lost $489,050 on a crypto investment platform in just three months. I contacted the authorities, who introduced me to QUICK RECOVERY , which assisted me in recovering all of my money in less than two days. I'm speaking out to raise awareness about cryptocurrency thieves and do everything I can to decrease the number of victims to the bare minimum. Simply contact; davidmoore9951 @ GMAIL . COM if you have been a victim.

Do not take any Bonus offer from your broker or your manager, do not allow your broker manager trade on your behalf. That is how they manipulate traders funds. If you need assistance with retrieving your lost fund from your broker or Your account has been manipulated by your broker manager or maybe you are having challenges with withdrawals due to your account been manipulated. Kindly get in touch with (chrisharvey553 at gm ail . com) he will guide you on simple and effective steps to take in getting your entire fund back.

“decentralised metaverse platform with infinite possibilities”

He lives in the metaverse....

And they called him Hiro Protagonist.

I'm not for victim blaming generally, but who puts their money into a company that says this:

>"...create a parallel system of existence that will change how people live, how we interact with people around the world, and even how companies and corporations will conduct business."

What is supposed to mean, other being some thought-terminating word salad to fool less cynical people?

How is this different than the argument to sell NFTs that are jpegs that somehow have some value, or token's having value from all these random crypto sites. And they take your 'hard crypto' eth or btc and somehow manipulate trading to make the ftx tokens worth billions.

I interviewed at a company that was making tools for analyzing this world and they had similar arguments about the world changing impact of their analysis tools.

> How is this different than the argument to sell NFTs...

It isn't. Those were scams too.

Exactly this.

Isn't this taken from the WeWork pitch?

Crypto people being dishonest and trying to mislead people?

I'm shocked. Shocked!

https://web3isgoinggreat.com has no shortage of content.

Why would anyone actually expect for any crypto company not to be a total scam, and for any of the people running it actually using their real names in the first place, or even exist?

Maybe he was an NFT all along.

very similar to the new netflix documentary bitconned

Also reminds me of ‘Onecoin’ - similar ‘nation’ framing and mysterious leaders.

There’s a good BBC podcast series about it, “The Missing Crypto Queen”: https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p07nkd84/episodes/downloads

The article portrays this as a negative, but all I'm seeing is an innovative way to save on sky-high CEO cost. We've always dreamed of operating without and now we have, it seems like exactly the opposite reaction.

Exactly, since when does a CEO in a Hyperverse company need to exist in this universe? It is enough if he/she/it exists in some other timeline and can be leveraged across the Multiverse. Clearly just another attempt to badmouth crypto.

It’s when the Hyperverse crosses into the real-a-verse that a person with a social security number or birth certificate is required. You can’t just make people up. If you operate without a CEO then operate without one. Don’t pretend one exists to get real-a-verse money for your hyperverse. That’s fraud.

Whoosh

except for the part where the company collapsed, so just maybe there's an argument to be made that there might be problems with this approach.

...I mean besides the obvious "running a crypto fund in a landscape where knowing what you're even doing is not a barrier to entry", of course.

I've known plenty of human-run companies that have collapsed.

We clearly need more data.

Reigning in costs on the CEO doesn’t mean we need to swing to the other side of the spectrum and commit fraud and portray some image as the CEO. Hopefully you are doing a tongue in cheek commentary

I know a lot of companies that could really tighten up their operations and balance sheet by adopting this strategy.

AI powered CEO? I love it already.

Max Boardroom

The q-q-q-q-quarterly earnings are up!

Your statement is irrelevant!!!

You will be obliterated!!!

The good of the body is the prime directive.

I am Landru!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EtWmLIoN6Sg

Amazing savings on yachts, too; all they need is a 3D printer, a bathtub full of water and the tears of executives for salinity.

If a CEO is all cost and no value, they would not exist.

> with video messages of support from a clutch of celebrities released on Twitter the following month

They really should charge more of these celebrities for endorsing pyramid schemes.

It is unclear how these messages of support were obtained, but all four celebrities are available to hire through the website Cameo, which allows people to pay high-profile individuals to read out a script for them, for anything from a birthday greeting to a business marketing video.
The Norris “shout out” to HyperVerse states that “under the leadership of CEO Steven, HyperVerse will be the leader of metaverse space”.
Wozniak said: “I’m here to support Steven and HyperVerse”, and “I can’t wait for the HyperVerse”.
Norton described HyperVerse as a “decentralised metaverse platform with infinite possibilities” and encouraged people to sign up. “I strongly believe Steven will lead HyperVerse to success. Let’s all join the HyperVerse. What are you waiting for? Do it now.”
The video messages of support were released in January 2022 as HyperVerse was ramping up its global recruitment drive.

Guardian Australia contacted Wozniak, Norris, Norton and Bass for comment, but received no reply. There is no suggestion they had any knowledge of HyperVerse’s business model when filming the messages of support and they make no reference to money or investments.

It appears to me that if you are part of a service where people can book you to say and advertise whatever they want, including scams, and you do absolutely no checking of what you say there, that sounds a lot like you are running a service for scammers, and "I didn't know what I said there" should not count as a good justification.

There’s a really blurry line that needs more clarity.

When George Clooney tells me he uses Nespresso coffee pods, I don’t entirely believe him. If I found out that he didn’t, I can’t imagine trying to take legal action against him.

But Chuck Norris endorsing a cryptocurrency? Should he be required to do due diligence on a client before doing paid advertising for them? That also seems unfeasible. Then what about the Kardashians advertising dieting pills? Supermodels advertising cosmetic surgery?

It seems the line is affected by the fame of the celebrity, the product being advertised, and exactly what it is they say.

> When George Clooney tells me he uses Nespresso coffee pods, I don’t entirely believe him. If I found out that he didn’t, I can’t imagine trying to take legal action against him.

If a person knowingly lies in order to make money, why shouldn't they be legally at fault for committing fraud? Like, fine, we can make allowances for people reasonably believing that they were telling the truth and I understand that there are fuzzy cases, but there are also just objectively factually incorrect statements that were completely obvious to everybody involved.

> There’s a really blurry line that needs more clarity.

No, it isn't. At all.

> When George Clooney tells me he uses Nespresso coffee pods, I don’t entirely believe him. If I found out that he didn’t, I can’t imagine trying to take legal action against him.

So, he lied...?

> But Chuck Norris endorsing a cryptocurrency? Should he be required to do due diligence on a client before doing paid advertising for them?

Yes?

> That also seems unfeasible.

Then don't take the gig.

> Then what about the Kardashians advertising dieting pills? Supermodels advertising cosmetic surgery?

Then. Do. Not. Take. The. Gig.

---

The only reason this could possibly seem blurry at all is if you approach it with the baffling prior that celebrities selling out their trust is a good thing that should be allowed to happen at any cost, and work backwards from there.

It's almost as if marketing is inherently evil.

Marketing is like cryptocurrency, it isn't inherently evil, but... only just.

In general, these also arent statement of fact.

>"HyperVerse will be the leader of metaverse space"- Norris

IF you actually think Chuck Norris has a godlike ability to know the future, and is making promissory statements of fact, the liability lies with you.

Perhaps if they make material statements of fact. If the Woz says something like "I personally invested $X in this company and guarantee it will make a profit" and it is all a lie, sure that is false advertising.

Otherwise, it is just paid actors acting.

it's crazy that Wozniak would participate in such a service. Is he running out of money?

I think some just like making themselves available, but then you see a lot of the ones listed on Cameo that looks "cheap" at ~$100 or so are videos of an average length <2m. If you can make $100 whenever you're bored and have 2 minutes or can sit down and churn out 20 in less than an hour for $2k, you might be tempted even if you have decent amounts of money.

It's a very low effort way for him to make money, $500 to record a 1-5 minute long personal video, or even more for "business" videos, $10k/video + $2,5k-$12,5k for license depending on duration

That's very cynical. What's the point of "fuck you" money if you still have to be a talking money and sell your reputation?

It's ironic that you call it cynical, but assume they see it as being a talking monkey (I assume "money" was a typo) and selling their reputation. That seems overly cynical to me. Many people will happily do things where the financial payoff doesn't really move the needle for all kinds of reasons ranging from enjoying it or wanting to be available to fans and admirers, to just filling dead time or boring moments. I'd imagine part of the appeal is that these services have made it quick and easy to use it as a way to fill dead time doing something (talking to fans) they often end up doing for free anyway.

On His Cameo profile his rate is 10k for 10 minutes and says he is doing it for charity.

I think there is a big cultural and generational divide on if these types of associations are even reputation negative.

Wozniak had like 4 marriages and 3 children, in a state that loves bleeding breadwinners dry in family court ( in fact after 10 years spouse is considered used up and fully depreciated so could be lifelong payouts). This may be a scenario similar to the doctor who killed Michael Jackson, who despite massive income was drowning and did desperate things .

Couldn't he just have made another guest appearance on The Big Bang Theory?

As much as I adore him, his hands are already dirty from participating in various BitCoin scams before.

https://www.coindesk.com/tag/steve-wozniak/

Video: Apple Co-Founder Loses Bitcoin Scam Ads Lawsuit Against YouTube. Steve Wozniak, co-founder of Apple, recently lost his case against YouTube involving ads for a crypto scam that used his name and image without permission. Similar scam ads us... By CoinDesk Staff Jun 3, 2021

Markets: Apple Co-Founder Steve Wozniak Loses Case Against YouTube Involving Bitcoin Scam. A California superior court judge ruled the social media giant was not responsible for its users' content. By Sebastian Sinclair Jun 3, 2021

Finance: Apple Co-Founder Wozniak’s New Venture Lists Token to Help Fund Energy Efficiency Projects. Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak has launched Efforce, a company that facilitates investments in energy efficiency projects via cryptocurrency and blockchain technology. By David Pan Dec 5, 2020

Markets: Apple Co-Founder Steve Wozniak Sues YouTube Over Bitcoin Giveaway Scams. Wozniak is among 18 plaintiffs suing the video-sharing giant for allowing crypto giveaway scams using his likeness to flourish on the platform. By Sandali Handagama Jul 23, 2020

Markets: Steve Wozniak Has Joined an Energy-Focused Blockchain Startup in Malta. The Apple co-founder has joined his second blockchain enterprise, one targeting more efficient use of energy. By Daniel Palmer Jul 19, 2019

Markets: Apple Co-Founder Steve Wozniak Joins Crypto Startup Equi: Report. Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak said Tuesday that he's now working with investment-focused crypto startup Equi, though his role is as yet unclear. By Nikhilesh De Aug 21, 2018

Markets: Tech Legend Steve Wozniak Scammed Out of $70K in Bitcoin. Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak says he once lost seven bitcoin, worth more than $71,000 today, to a ruse involving a stolen credit card number. By Annaliese Milano Feb 27, 2018

They used his name and image without permission and illegally in a scam. That's the opposite of participating.

Keep reading. That was after directly participating in at least two crypto companies himself, Efforce and Equi. So he's been both victim and perpetrator.

The fact that he had already been willingly involved in and personally endorsed multiple Crypto schemes makes it even more plausible that people would believe other scams claiming to have his endorsement.

After getting scammed out of $70k and losing a lawsuit about having his likeness used without his permission, perhaps he should be more reluctant and picky about personally endorsing other crypto scams.

When you lay down with dogs, you get up with fleas.

We're the companies he was involved in scams or are you just assuming everything that involves crypto is a scam?

What crypto company isn't a scam?

>Apple Co-Founder Wozniak’s New Venture Lists Token to Help Fund Energy Efficiency Projects. Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak has launched Efforce, a company that facilitates investments in energy efficiency projects via cryptocurrency and blockchain technology.

Do you actually believe a crypto company that claims to be concerned about energy efficiency isn't a scam??!

>Apple Co-Founder Steve Wozniak Joins Crypto Startup Equi: Report. Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak said Tuesday that he's now working with investment-focused crypto startup Equi

Do you actually believe a crypto company that claims to be dispensing investment advice isn't a scam??!

If you believe that, have I got a sure bet for you:

https://twitter.com/molly0xFFF/status/1742218595935953286

>Molly White @molly0xFFF

>sorry to everyone who lost internet points on this

>Will Molly White (Web3 is Going Just Great) recant during 2023?

>jon jordan

>Will https://web3isgoinggreat.com/ have to make a significant retraction of its mission and praise blockchain during 2023?

Maybe jon jordan who made that bet just didn't realize that the title of Molly's blog was sarcastic.

Molly White isn't a reputable source

So you took that bet? How much did you lose?

No. Your comment doesn't make sense. Why would someone whose whole brand is talking shit about crypto switch it up? She has her audience and it works for her. She's clearly biased and not a good source for anything.

Does she make you sad that nobody believes or respects crypto shills any more?

Haha. No. Do you honestly think I think that?

If you honestly admit you believe and respect crypto shills, I'll honestly admit I believe you still do, but you're still an exception, thanks to Molly White and people like her and Dan Olson and Stephen Findeisen and Chris Natsuume, who seem to irritate you so much by simply educating people about the truth about crypto shills and scams and NFTs and Web3.

Dan Olson (Folding Ideas): Line Goes Up – The Problem With NFTs

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQ_xWvX1n9g

>If someone pitches you on a "great" Web3 project, ask them if it requires buying or selling crypto to do what they say it does.

Stephen Findeisen (Coffeezilla): The END of Sam Bankman Fried

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hzko-cjHhTg

>The worst scammer faces justice and I went to go watch. Full breakdown and deep dive into the trial of Sam Bankman Fried.

Chris Natsuume (Ninesquirrels): Let me explain Blockchain gaming and Play-to-Earn.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UKzup7XDyq8

>NFTs are a pure scam. Blockchain gaming is a pyramid scheme. Play-to-Earn is not only a scam, it's deeply immoral.

Chris Natsuume (Ninesquirrels): Using NFTs to own ingame objects: Also pretty much a scam.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8IYjsWBbmKI

>In this video, I'd like to clarify and further explain: Using NFTs to own ingame objects is an unnecessarily inefficient byproduct of a larger scam.

Maybe you shouldn't endorse a company when "there is no suggestion they had any knowledge of HyperVerse’s business model". I think every one of these celebrities should be held liable for the bullshit they say.

Given the extremely lax laws around advertising (any el-crappo pizza joint can claim to have the world's best pizza, etc.), and that none of the celebs have any formal credentials in either crypto or finance, and that their relationship with Hyperverse was "paid $Standard_Fee to read words to a camera" - what laws have they broken, to be "charged" with anything?

Why? They don't make these deals directly, their agent or business managers do due diligence. And all the DD that's required is "Will my client be paid in full?"

None of these celeb endorsements include claims of financial solvency or guaranteed returns.

If it's correct they got them via Cameo, Cameo does all the work, and the customer will agrees to terms that include providing factual information, so you're probably right that there's next to no DD because they know the money will be coming and unless it's some acute reputational risk I assume they'll just trust Cameo to deal with any problems. And presumably, Cameo does a lot of work to convince them they don't need to.

Seeing that it was Cameo, yes, Wozniak should carry some responsibility here. He wasn't exactly wishing someone a happy birthday.

Is his name Satoshi?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com