Satish Kumbhani, who is accused of scamming people out of $2.4bn in a cryptocurrency Ponzi scheme, has disappeared while evading an American watchdog, a court was told this week.

The BitConnect founder fled his home nation of India and went to ground in another country as the US Securities and Exchange Commission sought to serve a civil fraud lawsuit on him regarding the alleged scam, it is claimed.

“In October 2021, the commission learned that Kumbhani has likely relocated from India to an unknown address in a different foreign country,” Richard Primoff, general attorney at the SEC, said in a letter [PDF] to US federal district Judge John Koeltl on Monday.

[…]

In September, the regulator claimed BitConnect defrauded folks out of billions of dollars by running a Ponzi-like scheme that promised financial returns of up to 40 per cent per month all thanks to its automated crypto-trading bot.

Instead, people’s digital funds were allegedly secretly pocketed by Kumbhani and his associate Glenn Arcaro, who last year pleaded guilty to conspiring to cheat Bitconnect investors. Arcaro faces up to 20 years behind bars. Kumbhani, however, is still at large.

[…]

Source: BitConnect boss accused of $2.4bn fraud has disappeared • The Register

We’ve said it over and over again, if libraries did not exist today, there is no way publishers would allow them to come into existence. We know this, in part, because of their attempts to stop libraries from lending ebooks, and to price ebooks at ridiculous markups to discourage libraries, and their outright claims that libraries are unfair competition. And we won’t even touch on their lawsuit over digital libraries.

Anyway, in other book news, you may have heard recently about how a Tennessee school board banned Art Spiegelman’s classic graphic novel about the Holocaust, Maus, from being taught in an eighth-grade English class.

[…]

aus is now back atop various best seller lists, as the controversy has driven sales. Spiegelman is giving fun interviews again where he says things like “well, who’s the snowflake now?” And we see op-eds about how the best way get kids not to read books… is to assign it in English class.

But, also, we have publishers getting into the banning business themselves… by trying to capitalize on the sudden new interest in Maus.

Penguin Random House doesn’t want this new interest in Maus to lead to… people taking it out of the library rather than buying a copy. They’re now abusing copyright law to demand the book be removed from the Internet Archive’s lending library, and they flat out admit that they’re doing so for their own bottom line:

A few days ago, Penguin Random House, the publisher of Maus, Art Spiegelman’s Pulitzer Prize-winning graphic novel about the Holocaust, demanded that the Internet Archive remove the book from our lending library. Why? Because, in their words, “consumer interest in ‘Maus’ has soared” as the result of a Tennessee school board’s decision to ban teaching the book. By its own admission, to maximize profits, a Goliath of the publishing industry is forbidding our non-profit library from lending a banned book to our patrons: a real live digital book-burning.

This is just blatant greed laid bare. As the article notes, whatever problems US copyright law has, it has enshrined the concept of libraries, and the right to lend out books as a key element of the public interest. And the publishers — such as giants like Penguin Random House — would do anything possible to stamp that right out.

Source: Penguin Random House Demands Removal Of Maus From Digital Library Because The Book Is Popular Again | Techdirt

At the same time car companies are fighting the right to repair movement (and the state and federal legislation popping up everywhere), they’re continuing the quest to turn everyday features — like heated seats — into something users have to pay a recurring fee for.

In 2019, BMW had to abandon a plan to charge $80 per year for Apple CarPlay. The company, having learned nothing, began floating the idea of charging a subscription for features back in 2020, when it proposed making heated seats and heated steering wheels something you pay a permanent monthly fee for. Last December, Toyota proposed imposing a monthly fee for customers who wanted to be able to remotely start their vehicles.

Each and every time these proposals come forward the consumer response is swift and overwhelmingly negative. But with $20 billion in annual additional potential revenue on the table between now and 2030, the industry seems poised to ignore consumers:

“Still, automakers see dollar signs. Stellantis (formerly Fiat Chrysler), Ford, and GM each aim to generate at least $20 billion in annual revenue from software services by 2030. Over-the-air capabilities open up huge opportunities for carmakers to introduce new subscription or pay-per use features over time, Wakefield, of AlixPartners, said. Someday, you may be able to fork over extra to make your car more efficient, sportier, or — in an electric vehicle — unlock extra range for road trips.”

Keep in mind these are decisions being made during a pandemic when most households continue to struggle.

This sort of nickel-and-diming works well in the telecom sector where captive subscribers often can’t switch to a different competitor. But in the auto space, companies risk opening the door to competitors gaining inroads by… not being nickel-and-diming assholes. Many companies may also be overestimating their own product quality; one JD Power survey found that 58% of people who use an automaker’s smartphone app wouldn’t be willing to pay for it. At the same time, as with gaming microtransactions, if enough people are willing to pay to make it worth it, it may not matter what the majority of car consumers think.

Source: Automakers Can’t Give Up The Idea Of Turning Everyday Features Into Subscription Services With Fees | Techdirt

[…]

Knox describes herself as “one of the most outspoken sex workers, particularly for crypto.” Her interest kicked off in 2014, which is when she says several vendors, including PayPal, Square Cash, and Venmo, shut down her accounts because of red flags related to sex work.

So Knox started accepting cryptocurrencies instead. Her first exchange of bitcoin for content was pretty casual.

It started on a Skype call with a client. “I had a Coinbase account at the time, and he said, ‘Hold your QR code right to this camera here,’ and he sent it through the camera. And I got it,” she explained.

It took 15 minutes, and there were no chargebacks, no website commission fees, and no bank intermediaries to turn down the transaction – all major pluses in her industry. But the biggest attraction was having total and irreversible ownership over the money she had earned.

[…]

“The majority of sex work in the U.S. is legal. It’s not dealt with fairly, but it’s still legal,” explained Kristen DiAngelo, an activist and Sacramento-based sex worker who has spent over four decades in the industry. “Stripping is legal…massage is legal…escorting is legal. The only thing that’s really illegal in the U.S. is the honest exchange of sexual activity for remuneration, for money.”

Some escorts – who charge anywhere from $1,700 an hour to $11,000 for a full 24 hours – now explicitly say in their ads that they prefer to be paid in bitcoin or ethereum.

[…]

Allie Rae is a 37-year-old mother of three boys who says she went from making about $84,000 a year as an ICU nurse in Boston to $1.3 million, thanks to her work on OnlyFans, which has more than 130 million users.

[…]

DiAngelo tells CNBC she will never forget the first time her bank account was closed without warning.

It happened when she was on a trip to Washington, D.C. over a decade ago.

“I had just gone into the bank, made a deposit, and I went to buy lunch in Dupont Circle,” said DiAngelo. “I gave him my card, and it was declined. I gave him my card, and it was declined again. And I gave my card again, and it was declined again. And I was like, ‘No, no, no, no, that can’t be right. There’s something wrong.’”

DiAngelo called Citibank and learned that her account had been frozen and she should tear up her credit card. DiAngelo says the customer service rep told her that they weren’t “at liberty” to tell her why it had happened, and she would have to write a formal letter to request additional details.

They did, however, say that she was still responsible for any money owed.

[…]

So DiAngelo did what other sex workers do: She “platform hopped,” meaning that she brought her money to another bank. When they also flagged and closed her account, she moved on to the next. After being shut out of a third bank, DiAngelo says she turned exclusively to bitcoin for her online banking needs.

Nearly every sex worker interviewed for this story mentioned platform hopping. The government has a set of anti-trafficking guidelines drawn up by the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, or FinCEN, and the banks and big payment apps keep an eye out for activity deemed suspicious by those guidelines. Those red flags include making cash deposits frequently – a hallmark of the sex work profession.

[…]

In 2014, for example, PayPal booted her because of a payment for her used socks that was large enough to get red-flagged. Knox says neither she nor the buyer were refunded. (PayPal tells CNBC that her account was “closed due to policy violations.”)

Later, in 2016, Coinbase closed her account and blocked her from making others. (Coinbase acknowledged to CNBC that its terms of service prohibit the use of its “commerce or retail services connected to adult content.”)

“We’re the ones being punished – not the traffickers, not those that are actually abusing workers,” said Alana Evans, who has been an adult performer since the late 90′s. Evans is currently president of the Adult Performance Artists Guild, or APAG, a federally recognized union within the adult industry that represents all workers from adult film set actors, to content creators.

“They’ve attacked our banking; our ability to operate like the rest of the world,” explained DiAngelo. “You don’t exist if you can’t use the banking system.”

[…]

One hazard of the trade are chargebacks, in which a transaction is reversed when a consumer claims they have been fraudulently charged for a good or service they did not receive. It is a tool designed to protect consumers, but many sex workers say it is a tool that is abused in their industry by clients who dispute a transaction for a product or service they have already received.

Take OnlyFans. There are some customers who will dispute a transaction once they’ve already received custom video clips, or photos. OnlyFans’ official policy on its website says the creator, not the company, foots the bill for a chargeback. (OnlyFans did not respond to requests for comment.)

Many models have taken to forums like Reddit to share their experiences, in which they say these alleged scammers will sometimes put in for a chargeback six months after receiving pictures or videos.

Transactions in cryptocurrencies are final, rendering chargebacks impossible.

[…]

UK-based escort agency VIP Passion started to accept bitcoin in 2013. Two years later, Backpage made a similar move into bitcoin, litecoin, and dogecoin after Visa and Mastercard refused to process payments for its “adult” section.

Visa said at the time that the company’s rules prohibited the network from “being used for illegal activity” and that Visa had a “long history of working with law enforcement to safeguard the integrity of the payment system.” Mastercard issued a similar statement, saying that the card company has rules prohibiting its cards from “being used for illegal or brand-damaging activities.”

[…]

Stabile warns there are still barriers to mass crypto adoption among sex workers.

For one, there’s a steep learning curve for both workers and customers. Sex workers have written and circulated guides online on how to use crypto, but a sizable knowledge gap remains.

It is also difficult to get some customers to spend their bitcoin on adult content.

“They generally use it as a store of value,” says Stabile. “It’s a speculative currency.”

Knox says often clients choose not to pay her in crypto.

“That’s the hurdle that we’re at right now. We can take it all day long, but until people start using it and start paying us with it, it’s not going to really take off for adoption,” said Knox.

Sex workers who do accept crypto also have to contend with volatile prices, which can cut into their earnings. For instance, bitcoin is down more than 40% from its November all-time high.

[…]

DiAngelo says that in the early days of crypto, she would use bitcoin ATMs at liquor stores and gas stations to deposit cash to buy bitcoin. These machines charge commissions above and beyond the cost of the transaction.

Another major problem relates to the rules that govern cryptocurrency exchanges. Many platforms like Coinbase require know-your-customer, or KYC compliance. In practice, that means having to connect an ID and bank account to the platform – a non-starter for many working in the industry.

Because of this, some workers later find they can’t cash out the crypto they have earned for products or services rendered.

[…]

“For people like me making millions of dollars, a thirty day notice from OnlyFans would be the end of us. Crypto really feels like it’s kinda it, otherwise we’re going to be controlled forever and who knows the kind of content they’re going to continue to ban. They can turn you off tomorrow.”

Source: Bitcoin a lifeline for sex workers, like ex-nurse making $1.3 million

The Dutch antitrust watchdog on Monday fined apple Apple (AAPL.O) 5 million euros ($5.72 million) for a third time for failing to allow software application makers in the Netherlands to use non-Apple payment methods for dating apps listed in the company’s App Store.

The Authority for Consumers and Markets (ACM) has been levying weekly fines of 5 million euros on Apple since the company missed a Jan. 15 deadline to make changes ordered by the watchdog.

Apple, which could not immediately be reached for comment, has twice published information on its own blog about changes it is making to comply with the Dutch order. However, the ACM said on Monday it was not receiving enough information from the U.S. company to assess whether Apple was actually complying.

“ACM is disappointed in Apple’s behaviour and actions,” it said in a statement. It noted that Dutch courts have upheld its decision, which found that Apple’s behaviour violated competition law.

[…]

Source: Dutch watchdog fines Apple $5.7 million again in App Store dispute

Developers reacted with astonishment and anger at Apple’s 27% commission policy as a minimal form of compliance with a new antitrust law regarding the App Store.

One leading developer described the move as ‘vile,’ while another said Apple is deliberately ensuring it would cost developers more to opt-out of Apple’s payment system than it would to remain within it …

 

Background

Dutch regulators, like those in South Korea, ordered that Apple allow developers to opt-out of the App Store payment platform. Apple initially said that it would comply, but didn’t give any details.

The company today announced that it would reduce its commission by only three percent for those who chose to do so, and would also impose onerous administrative overheads – such as applying for permission to use a specific API, maintaining a separate version of the app, and filing reports with Apple.

[…]

Marco Arment highlighted the conditions imposed by Apple:

• Separate app, only available in Netherlands
• Cannot also support IAP
• Must display scary sheets before payment
• Website links are all to a single URL specified in Info.plist with no parameters
• Must submit monthly report to Apple listing EVERY external transaction

Adding:

And after you pay your ~3% to your payment processor, Apple’s 27% commission takes you right back up to 30%. Glorious. Come on, THIS is comedy. Amazing, ridiculous comedy. I’d be surprised if a single app ever took them up on this. (And that’s exactly by design.)

[…]

Source: Developers react to 27% commission with astonishment, anger – 9to5Mac

Intel Corporation no longer has to pay a €1.06bn ($1.2bn, £890m) fine imposed by the European Commission (EC) in 2009 for abusing its dominance of the chip market.

On Wednesday, the General Court of the European Union annulled the EC antitrust penalty [PDF] after previously upholding it in 2014 [PDF].

After rival AMD complained in 2000 and again in 2003 that Intel was engaging in anti-competitive conduct by offering its hardware partners rebates for using Intel’s x86 chips, an EC antitrust investigation that got underway in 2004 and concluded in 2009 with a €1.06 billion penalty against Chipzilla.

The EC at the time found Intel’s conduct between October 2002 and December 2007 to be anti-competitive.

“The evidence gathered by the Commission led to the conclusion that Intel’s conditional rebates and payments induced the loyalty of key OEMs and of a major retailer, the effects of which were complementary in that they significantly diminished competitors’ ability to compete on the merits of their x86 CPUs,” the EC said in its 2009 decision. “Intel’s anti-competitive conduct thereby resulted in a reduction of consumer choice and in lower incentives to innovate.”

[…]

The ruling suggests that EU trustbusters won’t be able to constrain corporate behavior if alleged misconduct fails to fit within the limited definition of competitive abuse under EU law (Article 102 TFEU). According to the Associated Press, EC VP Margrethe Vestager said at a press briefing in Brussels that the EC needs more time to consider what comes next.

[…]

Source: Intel’s $1.2bn EU antitrust fine cancelled by court • The Register

Which begs the question – why is China leading the way in anti-competitive lawmaking?

In January 2021, stock trading app Robinhood infuriated users when it responded to surging trades of so-called meme stocks, by halting trades—effectively preventing users from selling shares until the prices had collapsed. Congressional hearings, regulatory probes, and a deluge of regulatory complaints and lawsuits ensued, which was at least one cause of its initial public offering’s wretched post-IPO performance. A year later, at least one investor has finally succeeded in forcing Robinhood to pay out for the fiasco.

As Marketwatch first reported, on Jan. 6, an arbitrator for the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) ruled in favor of 27-year-old truck driver Jose Batista’s May 2021 complaint that the restrictions caused him to lose significant amounts of money, finding the stock-trading app owes him nearly $29,500 in restitution. FINRA has previously slapped Robinhood with roughly $70 million in penalties for system outages in March 2020, issuing false and/or misleading information to investors, and failing to abide by rules designed to protect investors; the Securities and Exchange Commission also fined the company $65 million in 2020 on similar grounds. But according to Marketwatch, this is the first time any retail investor complaints specifically related to the 2021 meme stock restrictions have resulted in a monetary judgment.

That’s perhaps because previous attempts to get the company to pay up have relied on elaborate theories Robinhood halted the trades in order to please partner Citadel Securities, its prime market maker. The exact nature of Robinhood’s relationship with Citadel attracted attention from both angry investors and members of Congress. FINRA has previously concluded the accusations of collusion had no merit.

[…]

Batista made a “narrow and specific case” against Robinhood, according to Marketwatch, saying that he focused on how the restrictions made him unable to manage his investments in headphone maker Koss and fast-fashion retailer Express Inc. Shortly before the restrictions went into place, Koss was trading at $58 a share and Express was trading at $9.55; by the time Robinhood lifted them, Koss was down to $35 and Express shares were just $5. (While he had Gamestop stock, he had no intention of selling at that point, he told Marketwatch.)

“My plan was to sell Koss and Express that day,” Batista told the site. “I had a lot, but no one could buy it… They basically left me with no other option. They were saying ‘You’re just stuck. If you want to sell it. Sell it.’”

[…]

Batista made a “narrow and specific case” against Robinhood, according to Marketwatch, saying that he focused on how the restrictions made him unable to manage his investments in headphone maker Koss and fast-fashion retailer Express Inc. Shortly before the restrictions went into place, Koss was trading at $58 a share and Express was trading at $9.55; by the time Robinhood lifted them, Koss was down to $35 and Express shares were just $5. (While he had Gamestop stock, he had no intention of selling at that point, he told Marketwatch.)

“My plan was to sell Koss and Express that day,” Batista told the site. “I had a lot, but no one could buy it… They basically left me with no other option. They were saying ‘You’re just stuck. If you want to sell it. Sell it.’”

[…]

Source: Robinhood Must Pay User $29,460 Over Meme Stock Trading Halt

Apple will grudgingly allow dating app developers in the Netherlands to use alternative payment methods in the App Store, but it doesn’t like it, and the score hasn’t been settled yet.

In an update on its developers’ blog on Friday, Apple said dating app developers will have two new optional “entitlements” in the App Store, which sounds strangely medieval, but OK. Besides using Apple’s in-app payment system—which nearly all developers worldwide are obligated to use, with some exceptions—they will also be able to include an in-app link directing users to their website to make a purchase or use a third-party payment system in the app.

According to Apple, developers can choose only one of the two entitlements and have to request it from Apple. For those who want to continue using Apple’s in-app payment system, where the company takes between a 15% and 30% cut of every purchase, no action is needed.

[…]

Source: Apple Lets Developers in the Netherlands Offer Payment Options

Yes, a small country can make a big difference!

Thieves operating for the North Korean government made off with almost $400m in digicash last year in a concerted attack to steal and launder as much currency as they could.

A report from blockchain biz Chainalysis found that attackers were going after investment houses and currency exchanges in a bid to purloin funds and send them back to the Glorious Leader’s coffers. They then use mixing software to make masses of micropayments to new wallets, before consolidating them all again into a new account and moving the funds.

Bitcoin used to be a top target but Ether is now the most stolen currency, say the researchers, accounting for 58 per cent of the funds filched. Bitcoin accounted for just 20 per cent, a fall of more than 50 per cent since 2019 – although part of the reason might be that they are now so valuable people are taking more care with them.

Source: North Korea made ‘$400m’ in cryptocurrency heists last year • The Register

Yet another developer of open source software has tired of companies utilizing the code he helps maintain without giving anything back to support the project.

On Tuesday, Christofer Dutz, creator of Apache PLC4X, said he will stop providing community support for the software if corporate users fail to step up and open their wallets.

“The industry seems to like using PLC4X and open-source in general, but doesn’t seem to be willing to support the people working on it,” he wrote in a post to GitHub. “So, I will stop providing free community support for PLC4X.”

Dutz is one of six listed maintainers of Apache PLC4X, a set of libraries for communicating with programmable logic controllers – industry-specific devices involved in the automation of various manufacturing tasks. His demand for support exists outside his involvement with the Apache Foundation; he maintains a separate IT consultancy called c-ware to help companies design and implement PLC4X software to suit their respective businesses.

C-ware has launched several crowdfunding initiatives to adapt Apache PLC4X to Python, Rust, and TypeScript, among other enhancements, but these have barely attracted any funding commitments.

[…]

Source: Open source maintainer hits out at corporate freeloaders • The Register

With log4j fresh in memory it’s pretty clear that this widespread use of FOSS without any money going the way of the non-university funded maintainers is not sustainable

The Federal Trade Commission’s antitrust complaint that Facebook, er, Meta operates as a monopoly will be heard by the courts after the US watchdog’s initial lawsuit was dismissed.

In December 2020, the FTC accused Meta of “illegally maintaining its personal social networking (PSN) monopoly through a years-long course of anticompetitive conduct.” It threatened to break up the mega-corporation and undo its acquisitions Instagram and Whatsapp.

This legal challenge fell flat, however, when judges threw the case out six months later. Evidence supporting the idea it unlawfully dominated social media was said to be lacking though the regulator was given another chance to file an amended lawsuit. A federal judge has now agreed to hear the case this time.

“First, the FTC has now alleged enough facts to plausibly establish that Facebook exercises monopoly power in the market for PSN services,” Judge James Boasberg ruled [PDF] this week.

“Second, it has adequately alleged that the company’s dominant market share is protected by barriers to entry into that market. Third, the agency has also explained that Facebook not only possesses monopoly power, but that it has willfully maintained that power through anticompetitive conduct — specifically, the acquisitions of Instagram and WhatsApp.”

The amended lawsuit brings up pretty much the same allegations as the first lawsuit. It claims Meta has been operating as a monopoly for years with Instagram and Whatsapp under its belt, and that it has enforced anticompetitive practices to deter or thwart rivals.

[…]

Source: FTC’s latest monopoly lawsuit against Meta gets go-ahead • The Register

The Dutch antitrust authority has found that Apple’s rules requiring software developers to use its in-app payment system are anti-competitive and ordered it to make changes, four people familiar with the matter said, in the latest regulatory setback for the iPhone maker.

Apple’s app-store payment policies, in particular its requirement that app developers exclusively use its payment system where commissions range between 15% and 30%, have long drawn complaints from developers.

[…]

The Netherlands’ Authority for Consumers and Markets (ACM) last month informed the U.S. technology giant of its decision, making it the first antitrust regulator to make a finding the company has abused market power in the app store, though Apple is facing challenges in multiple countries.

ACM has not levied a fine against Apple, but demanded changes to the in-app payment system, the people said. The decision has not been seen by Reuters.

An ACM spokesperson declined to comment, saying that the matter is currently under legal review. The regulator has previously said it expects to publish its decision this year.

[…]

Source: EXCLUSIVE Dutch watchdog finds Apple app store payment rules anti-competitive – sources | Reuters

Game-making platform and fledgling metaverse Roblox made the news yesterday as the focus of a New York Times report about a ‘90s era tax cut that’s spun out of control. Originally created to foster investment in small businesses, the Qualified Small Business Stock, or Q.S.B.S., exemption has transformed into a way for ultra-wealthy businesses to avoid paying taxes on huge amounts of profits.

I’d say it seemed like a good idea at the time, but it really wasn’t. Launched in 1993, the Qualified Small Business Stock exemption was presented as a means to get more people investing in start-ups by shielding some of a company’s profits from taxation. Originally the exemption meant an investor would be shielded from paying taxes on half of profits up to 10 million dollars, but that was eventually changed to exempt the entire 10 million

[…]

the U.S. tax system for voting into being a loophole-laden exemption that would eventually be so abused that participating in it would be considered a right-of-passage for Silicon Valley’s ultra-wealthy. The problem with the Q.S.B.S. exemption is that it can be cloned. All it takes is gifting stock to friends and family. Though they haven’t invested in the company, they nevertheless still qualify for the exemption, so you can ensure that large chunks of money stay within close orbit of your control without needing to pay taxes on said cash.

According to financial reports and the New York Times’ sources, Roblox founder David Baszucki has been able to multiply the exemption 12 times over, gifting stock to his wife, his four children, and various other relatives. In the fall of 2020, months before Roblox went public, Baszucki’s mother-in-law started giving away shares to relatives. Since they were gifted, those shares also qualified for the exemption. In March of 2021, Roblox went public, valued at 45 billion.

While this all sounds horrible and super-cheaty, there’s nothing at all illegal about this practice. It has a name, stacking, but is also known as peanut-buttering

[…]

 

Source: Roblox Saves Millions Taking Advantage Of A Shocking Tax Dodge

Norton antivirus’s inbuilt cryptominer has re-entered the public consciousness after a random Twitter bod expressed annoyance at how difficult it is to uninstall.

The addition of Ncrypt.exe, Norton 360’s signed cryptocurrency-mining binary, to installations of Norton antivirus isn’t new – but it seems to have taken the non-techie world a few months to realise what’s going on.

Back in June, NortonLifeLock, owner of the unloved PC antivirus product, declared it was offering Ethereum mining as part of its antivirus suite. NortonLifeLock’s pitch, as we reported, was that people dabbling in cryptocurrency mining probably weren’t paying attention to security – so what better way than to take up a cryptocurrency miner than installing one from a trusted consumer security brand?

In return for you installing their cryptominer on your home PC, NortonLifeLock skims off a mere 15 per cent of whatever digital currency you generate. While this compares well to the 100 per cent takings that criminals covertly deploying cryptominers help themselves to, some might say it’s a bit excessive for minimal effort on Norton’s part.

[…]

“If you have turned on Norton Crypto, but you no longer want to use the feature, you can disable it through your Norton Crypto dashboard,” says the FAQ on Norton’s website.

Uninstalling it altogether takes a bit more persistence, it appears, with users needing to disable Norton Product Tamper Protection (intended to protect the antivirus product from being disabled or deleted by malware) before going through the usual Windows uninstallation steps.

Norton isn’t alone: last year a maker of Wi-Fi routers offered to mine cryptocurrency on users’ devices if they supplied connectivity to the general public.

[…]

Source: Yes, Norton 360 has a built in cryptominer. Deletion is easy • The Register

Google and Facebook have come a little unstuck in the cookie department as French watchdog Commission Nationale de l’Informatique et des Libertés (CNIL) slapped the pair with a €150m and €60m fine respectively.

The CNIL kicked off its investigations after receiving complaints regarding the way cookies can be refused on facebook.com, youtube.com and google.fr. The crux of the matter is that while there is a button to permit immediate acceptance of cookies, there is not the equivalent to refuse them as easily. “Several clicks are required to refuse all cookies, against a single one to accept them,” explained the CNIL.

“The restricted committee,” it went on, “considered that this process affects the freedom of consent: since, on the internet, the user expects to be able to quickly consult a website, the fact that they cannot refuse the cookies as easily as they can accept them influences their choice in favor of consent. This constitutes an infringement of Article 82 of the French Data Protection Act.”

[…]

Source: France fines Meta, Google: Cookies must be easier to reject • The Register

Electric- and hydrogen-powered truck startup Nikola has agreed to a $125 million settlement over charges that it defrauded investors after misleading them about its products, technical advances and financial prospects.

Nikola violated the antifraud and disclosure control provisions of the federal securities laws, the Securities and Exchange Commission said Tuesday.

In July the founder and one-time chair of Nikola, Trevor Milton, was freed on $100 million bail after pleading not guilty to charges alleging he lied about the company.

The U.S. Attorney’s Office in Manhattan, New York, charged Milton, 39, with two counts of securities fraud and wire fraud. He resigned as chairman in September.

The SEC said in its order that Milton embarked on a public-relations campaign aimed at inflating and maintaining Nikola’s stock price before the company had produced a vehicle.

The SEC also found that Milton misled investors about Nikola’s technological advancements, in-house production capabilities, hydrogen production, truck reservations and orders, and financial outlook. In addition, it found that Nikola misled investors by misrepresenting or omitting information about the refueling time of its prototype vehicles, as well as the economic risks and benefits associated with a potential partnership with General Motors.

[…]

Source: EV startup Nikola settles with U.S. for $125 million | The Seattle Times

Also see: Nikola Admits Prototype Was Rolling Downhill In Promo Video

[…]

According to court documents, Ishii switched the transfer address for a Sony Life transaction to use a Silvergate Bank account under his control..

Ishii later converted the stolen funds into more than 3879 bitcoins via A Coinbase set up to automatically transfer all added funds to an offline cryptocurrency cold wallet with a Bitcoin address of bc1q7rhc02dvhmlfu8smywr9mayhdph85jlpf6paqu.

After converting the money to cryptocurrency, Ishii also tried persuading his supervisor and several Sony Life executives not to help investigators by emailing them a ransom note typed in English and Japanese.

“If you accept the settlement, we will return the funds back. If you are going to file criminal charges, it will be impossible to recover the funds,” the note read.

“We might go down behind all of this, but one thing is for sure, you are going to be right there next to us. We strongly recommend to stop communicate (sic) with any third parties including law enforcement.”

Cryptocurrency seized following FBI investigation

However, on December 1, following an investigation in collaboration with Japanese law enforcement authorities, the FBI seized the 3879.16242937 BTC in Ishii’s wallet after obtaining the private key, which made it possible to transfer all the bitcoins to the FBI’s bitcoin wallet.

“Sony and Citibank immediately contacted and cooperated with law enforcement as soon as the theft was detected, and the FBI worked in partnership with both to locate the funds,” explained FBI Special Agent in Charge Suzanne Turner.

“Second, the FBI’s footprint internationally through our Legal Attaché offices and the pre-existing relationships we have established in foreign countries – in this instance with Japan – enabled law enforcement to coordinate and identify the subject.”

Tokyo’s Metropolitan Police Department arrested the 32-year-old Ishii the same day and criminally charged him on suspicion of obtaining $154 million dollars following fraudulent money transfers from mid-May.

[…]

Source: US returns $154 Million in bitcoins stolen by Sony employee

First, come up with a catchy name for a cryptocurrency project. Next, convince the credulous to buy associated digital tokens. Finally, abandon the project and keep investors’ funds.

This “rug pulling” scam lacks sophistication but evidently it works. According to Chainalysis, a blockchain data biz, separating cryptocoin buyers from their money in this manner has become particularly popular in the DeFi (decentralized finance) ecosystem and has contributed to a scam surge.

In a post previewing the company’s 2022 Crypto Crime Report, Chainalysis said scams constituted the largest form of cryptocurrency-based crime, as measured by transaction volume. Cryptocurrency investors – if that’s the right term – lost over $7.7bn worth of digital whatever in 2021.

That’s up 81 per cent from 2020, but 2020, amid the COVID-19 pandemic, was an unusual year. This year was not quite as bad as 2019, which was close to $10bn worth of scams. But there were more scams overall (3,300 in 2021, up from 2,052 in 2020), albeit with shorter lifespans (~70 days in 2021, compared to ~192 in 2020 and to around ~2,369 in 2013).

Take-the-money-and-run gambits should not to be confused with losses attributable to security shortcomings at DeFi services that let hackers steal funds, like the recent theft of some $120m in tokens from BadgerDAO or the $31m taken from MonoX. That’s a separate dumpster fire.

Source: Cryptocurrency ‘rug pulls’ cheated investors out of ‘$8bn’ • The Register

[…]

new research detailed in The Wall Street Journal suggests its inequality problems are worse than the United States’ disgraceful performance under the dollar. An incredible feat considering income inequality in 2020 America was the highest of all G7 nations according to data from Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development viewed by Pew Research.

That illustration, of a vanishingly small bitcoin financial elite, was revealed in a new National Bureau of Economic Research study written by professors from the MIT Sloan School of Management and London School of Economics. It found that of the 19 million bitcoin currently in circulation, just 0.01% of buyers control around 27% of the total supply. That 27% percent figure amounts to around 5 million bitcoins, which in turn comes out to about $232 billion USD. The top 1% wealthiest U.S. individuals, by comparison, control “only” about a third of all the country’s wealth, the Journal notes.

The professors conducted their research by, for the first time, mapping out and analyzing every single bitcoin transaction over its 13 years of existence.

[…]

there have been experts and academics sounding their own alarm bells around bitcoin’s potential inequality-inducing tendencies. In an interview with CNBC Cornell University, economics professor and author of The Future of Money Eswar Prasad granted cryptocurrencies may make digital payments more accessible but said that doesn’t guarantee any lessening of inequality.

“Because of existing inequalities in digital access and financial literacy, they [cryptocurrencies] could end up worsening inequality,

[…]

Despite all of this, mentions of “decentralization” and “democracy” and “independence” in relation to crypto abound as a new wave of Web3 investors and enthusiasts spend millions locking in NFTs and forming DAOs to make collective purchases.

Source: Bitcoin’s Inequality Problem Is Putting the Dollar to Shame