• 0 Posts
  • 36 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: September 17th, 2023

help-circle







  • There are a few ways that the court can get this money. Disclaimer I am not an expert in bankruptcy law.

    The most obvious one is what you said. The court can order the company’s assets to be liquidated and then the proceeds of the sales would be distributed proportionally among the creditors.

    Next they can go after the perpetrators like Sam Bankman-Fried and his crew. If they have any personal assets that they acquired as a result of their criminal activity at FTX, the court may be able to take some of that money to pay creditors.

    Lastly is “clawbacks”. Let’s say you invested $1,000,000 in FTX and you were one of the lucky ones and happened to withdraw $10,000,000 in proceeds during the height of the scam. The court could claw back up to $9,000,000 from you since all of those proceeds were the result of a scam, even if you had no idea that FTX was shady. This is typically how the courts recover money from ponzi schemes like Bernie Madhoff








  • TL;DR you can send emails from .onion addresses if you want, but no clearnet server is going to accept them.

    So when you send an email, you can actually put whatever you want in the from header. I could send an email that says from “made.this.up@website.doesnotexist”. The protocol doesn’t care.

    Do you know who does care? The email server you’re sending messages to, because spammers and scammers love to try and send email with fake from addresses.

    So, there’s an entire verification system in place that involves looking up public keys from the website that the email claims to be from. (this is a gross over simplification. Look up SPF, DKIM, and DMARC for more info). The problem is you can’t even reach .onion sites from the clearnet to do the lookups. So no email servers would be able to validate your address is legitimate and so would drop it as spam.




  • For most transmissions of digital information (even those here on earth) there’s a concept of a “checksum”. Basically at the end of every message, there’s a special number, and you can do some math on the rest of the message to get that same number. If anything happened to change or damage the message in transit, the math doesn’t work out and so the checksum fails.

    I would assume Voyager works in a similar way so every time it receives a message it will compute the checksum and see whether it matches