My Frozen Assets at BlockFi, Part3: I Finally Recovered 27% of My Original Funds.

Well, it’s finally over. As noted in previous blog posts, back when interest rates were essentially zero, I started an account with cryptocurrency investing firm BlockFi. They paid me a hefty 9% per year for lending out my crypto coin to “trusted institutional counterparties”, backed by large collateral. However, when  Sam Bankman-Fried’s FTX exchange went belly up, it took BlockFi with it. (Bankman-Fried, the former rock-star white knight of the crypto world, is now in prison for fraud).  My funds at BlockFi disappeared into the black hole of bankruptcy proceedings for about a year and a half.

Last month, a judge finally allowed a settlement for clients to withdraw their assets from their interest-bearing accounts. There were two wrinkles. First, you get far less than 100% of your funds. Most of my money got chewed up in the corporate bankruptcy itself, and then was eaten by the law firm (Kroll) processing the bankruptcy and the client reimbursement process. So,  I’m only getting about 27% percent of my money back.

As an aside, Kroll got hacked about a year ago, leaking the names and email addresses of us BlockFi clients, and so some scammer sent out a very well-crafted email that a number of people, including me (briefly) were taken in by, as I wrote earlier.  if you responded to that scam email, you ended up connecting your wallet to a scam application, which could then suck everything out of your wallet. Fortunately, I had almost nothing in my wallet for the short time I had it connected, but other victims lost considerable sums. I guess the reason why criminals continue to run crypto scams is because they are profitable, like the legendary bank robber Willie Sutton who robbed banks because “that’s where the money is.”

The other wrinkle In the BlockFi reimbursement is that they will only reimburse you with the actual cryptocurrency coin that you held, not with its dollar value. So, I had to set up a cryptocurrency wallet (I used Trust wallet) to receive my crypto, which was all in the form of the stablecoin USDC.

I had to do considerable background work to make this happen. In order to test that that wallet worked to receive USDC, I had to also set up a cryptocurrency exchange account, which I did with Coinbase (which seemed to be the most solid crypto exchange). I had to connect that account with my bank, put some money into the Coinbase exchange, buy some USDC, and send it to my crypto wallet to make sure that it all worked.


As of a week ago, after some fairly intrusive ID verification, the reimbursement machinery did finally deposit the measly remnants of my USDC into my wallet. OK, I thought, I’ll just transfer that to my Coinbase exchange account, turn the USDC into cash and be done with it all.


But not so fast… Because USDC is transferred over the Ethereum network, I had to have enough ETH coin in my Trust wallet to pay for the transfer. The network transfer cost, called the gas fee, was about eight dollars at midday, going down to about three dollars by 10 o’clock at night.

So, I had to go into my Coinbase account, convert some USDC there into ETH (incurring a $1.49 fee for that), and then send some ETH to my Wallet, incurring yet another a transfer fee there. Then I could use that ETH in my wallet to pay for the transfer of the USDC to my Coinbase exchange. Then at long last I was able to convert my USDC to cash and transfer it to my bank account, to finally put this whole BlockFi drama to rest.

Looking on the bright side of all this uproar, I now have a functioning cryptocurrency exchange account and wallet, and am familiar with elementary crypto operations. This might prove handy if I ever want to dabble more in this area or if some other need arises. For now, however, I have had enough of crypto.

ADDENDUM: Finally got all my BlockFi funds back as of November, 2024. BlockFi was able to claw back its assets from FTX, and fully reimburse its customers. Yay! This post describes the process:

https://economistwritingeveryday.com/2024/11/26/my-frozen-assets-at-blockfi-part-4-full-recovery-of-my-funds/

Zuckerberg wants to solve general intelligence

Why does Mark Zuckerberg want to solve general intelligence? Well, for one thing, if he doesn’t, one of his competitors will have a better chatbot. Zuckerberg wants to be the best (and good for him). At his core, he wants to build the best stuff (even the world’s best cattle on his ranch).

If AGI is possible, it will get built. I’m not the first person to point out that this is a new space race. If America takes a pause, then someone else will get there first. However, I thought the Zuck interview was an interesting microcosm for why AGI, if possible, will get made.

… We started FAIR about 10 years ago. The idea was that, along the way to general intelligence or whatever you wanna call it, there are going to be all these different innovations and that’s going to just improve everything that we do. So we didn’t conceive of it as a product. It was more of a research group. Over the last 10 years it has created a lot of different things that have improved all of our products. …
There’s obviously a big change in the last few years with ChatGPT and the diffusion models around image creation coming out. This is some pretty wild stuff that is pretty clearly going to affect how people interact with every app that’s out there. At that point we started a second group, the gen AI group, with the goal of bringing that stuff into our products and building leading foundation models that would power all these different products.
… There’s also basic assistant functionality, whether it’s for our apps or the smart glasses or VR. So it wasn’t completely clear at first that you were going to need full AGI to be able to support those use cases. But in all these subtle ways, through working on them, I think it’s actually become clear that you do. …
Reasoning is another example. Maybe you want to chat with a creator or you’re a business and you’re trying to interact with a customer. That interaction is not just like “okay, the person sends you a message and you just reply.” It’s a multi-step interaction where you’re trying to think through “how do I accomplish the person’s goals?” A lot of times when a customer comes, they don’t necessarily know exactly what they’re looking for or how to ask their questions. So it’s not really the job of the AI to just respond to the question.
You need to kind of think about it more holistically. It really becomes a reasoning problem. So if someone else solves reasoning, or makes good advances on reasoning, and we’re sitting here with a basic chat bot, then our product is lame compared to what other people are building. At the end of the day, we basically realized we’ve got to solve general intelligence… (emphasis mine)

Credit to Dwarkesh Patel for this excellent interview. Credit to M.Z. for sharing his thoughts on topics that affect the world.

“we’ve got to solve general intelligence” If a competitor solves AGI first, then you are left behind. No one would not want general intelligence on their team, on the assumption that it can be controlled.

I would like the AGI to do my chores for me, please. Unfortunately, it’s more likely to be able to write my blog posts first.

Instantly Filling Holes, Building Up Solids Using Superglue with Toilet Paper or Baking Soda

Speaking of microeconomics…I just learned of a hack that can save some money at home or in a business. It started with an email from an esteemed friend who leads an interesting life as a welder/rigger/artist. He helped build some of the giant sets at the Burning Man festival which, well, burned. His inquiry, with some personal references edited out, went like this:

At burning man i once watched a man save the day by patching a hole in the plastic gas tank of a golf cart with super glue, toilet paper and vinegar… Suddenly we had a functioning golf cart. Although I’ve never gotten to use this I remember this trick dearly.

Just today [my brother] was telling me about … breaking his glasses. …he had already fixed his glasses. How? He said “I’m pretty good at super glue and baking soda.”  …  He said the baking soda acts as an accelerant and gets very hard when you add super glue to it
.


Being a chemical engineer by background, and always curious about household chemistries, this got me poking about the internet. Here is what I found.

The main ingredient in most repair superglues is ethyl 2-cyanoacrylate, along with some polymethacrylate gel and a little sulfonic acid, which acts as a stabilizer. When the superglue comes in contact with moisture, that triggers the polymerization reaction, so the glue solidifies and bonds to surfaces. It works best as a very thin layer squeezed between two closely fitting surfaces. Thicker droplets of superglue may be very slow to harden or not harden at all, towards the middle.


Thus, superglue is notoriously bad for filling in gaps or spaces or holes. For gap filling, you would normally turn to epoxy glue (for strength) or silicone (for flexibility). These glues have their own advantages and disadvantages. I don’t think that either silicone or common epoxy would stand up well to gasoline.

My internet research found that porous paper, like toilet paper, tissue paper, or paper towel, can catalyze the hardening of superglue. You can stuff a hole with a wad of toilet paper, or make a shape out of paper towel, and saturate it with superglue, and it will instantly harden. For the nerds among us, I will note that paper is mainly cellulose, which is a polymer of sugar (glucose), which has water type -OH groups sticking out all over, which harbor a surface layer of adsorbed water.  This YouTube video by Mr Made  has excellent examples of using porous paper for super glue to instantly fill in a hole or build up a solid shape.

It is critical to use freshly opened superglue, and use a thin runny liquid formulation which will quickly saturate the paper, not a thick gel type superglue.

It turns out that baking powder can be used instead of porous paper with superglue to fill in holes or cracks or make solid shapes. You can sprinkle in a thin layer of baking soda, then saturate that with the glue, then add another layer of baking powder and glue, etc. This YouTube video , by The Maker,  nicely demonstrates this technique.

So there you have it, hack away with your superglue.

Don’t Try This At Home:


The main loose end from my researches involves the role of vinegar in that fix of the golf cart fuel tank at Burming Man. Vinegar is usually mentioned as a solvent for superglue, and chemically vinegar is an acid whereas baking soda is a base, so vinegar seems like the opposite of an accelerant for the polymerization. I can only speculate that for making a very thick wad of paper plus superglue to fix the fuel tank, the vinegar may have been used deliberately to slow down the glue hardening a bit. But that is just a guess. I think the cyanoacrylate superglue would have a reasonable chance to withstand gasoline, but I sure would be nervous about relying on such a patch for a fuel tank. It would not take much of a gasoline leak to make Burning Man all that more memorable. Don’t try THIS at home.

Joy on The Inductive Economy podcast

I got to be a guest of Vignesh Swaminathan who is based in Mumbai. It’s fun to have a deep conversation with someone on the other side of the world and share it with the whole internet (and the AI’s).

Apple podcast link: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/dr-joy-buchanan-on-understanding-economics-through/id1719744197?i=1000652541934

Blogpost with links and timestamps: https://www.inductive.in/p/dr-joy-buchanan-on-understanding

The first 10 minutes are about Tyler’s GOAT book. Vignesh asked me to name some influential economists who did not make Tyler’s list.

Around minute 12 we talk about the experimental economics methodology.

The middle (minute 15-42) is a discussion of the pipeline into tech and my Willingness to be Paid paper. He adds his perspective on tech jobs in India.

Around minute 42, Vignesh makes a switch over to the Barbie movie and then Oppenheimer. He observes that Oppenheimer is a “brand.” I speculate on careers in Barbieland. We recorded this before Christmas of ’23, right after everyone had seen these summer movies. Both movies ended up in the 2024 Oscars awards ceremony.

I predicted that people will eventually be able to create a custom movie from a verbal prompt, because of the AI content revolution. Here in Spring of ’24 that has already come true. Sora is shocking everyone and even caused Tyler Perry to halt a physical film studio expansion.

Around minute 55, we pivot to Hayek and competition, which leads to a postmortem on Google Plus (RIP).

1:05-1:16 features intellectual property and my IP experiment with Bart Wilson

Ended with rapid-fire and personal questions.

Skimming back through this conversation has me thinking about tech work. The market for IT workers and programmers has evolved since I first started the project that became “Willingness to be Paid: Who Trains for Tech Jobs?”

I like pointing people all the way back to this report on jobs from 1958. Learn to Code has been good advice for a long time, for the people who can tolerate the work. That does not mean it will be true forever, but I would argue that it is still true today.

Silicon Valley as a career might have peaked around 2021. It’s not going away, but it might not be growing anymore in terms of the number of talented people who can be absorbed there. (Might I suggest Huntsville instead?)

The WSJ recently ran a story “Tech Job Seekers Without AI Skills Face a New Reality: Lower Salaries and Fewer Roles”

The rise of artificial intelligence is affecting job seekers in tech who, accustomed to high paychecks and robust demand for their skills, are facing a new reality: Learn AI and don’t expect the same pay packages you were getting a few years ago.

Jobs in areas like telecommunications, corporate systems management and entry-level IT have declined in recent months, while roles in cybersecurity, AI and data science continue to rise, according to Janco’s data. The average total compensation for IT workers is about $100,000, making the position a target for continued cost-cutting.

One reason tech jobs are less attractive than some other professional paths is that the skillset changes. We mentioned this as a drawback in our policy paper. Computers are constantly changing. Vignesh and I discuss the issue of risk. I suggested that companies could pay less for talent if they were willing to offer packages that carry less risk of getting fired.

Nevertheless, tech still has decent job prospects. An unemployment rate of about 5% is about normal for work, even though tech had seen lower rates at the peak of demand. I do not know what programming as a career will look like in 10 years, but I’d say the same about screenwriting and live sports commentary. The LLMs are coming for everything or nothing or something in between.

I’ve been on tour (regionally) with our ChatGPT paper and getting opportunities to query different audiences about their LLM use. Last week I talked to a young man in our business school who is using ChatGPT to write SQL code at his job. I said in the podcast that I would still advise young people in Alabama to learn to code, even if they are not going to move to Silicon Valley. I think coding is more fun in the LLM-age or at least less miserable.

Recovering My Frozen Assets at BlockFi 2. Scams and More Scams

As I noted last month, the crypto lending firm BlockFi has started to send back to its customers some of their funds which had been frozen for over a year, since the demise of Sam Bankman-Fried’s FTX exchange led to BlockFi likewise vanishing into the mists of Chapter 11.  As BlockFi emerges from bankruptcy, they are reimbursing customers in two tiers. Those who had crypto sitting in their “wallet” on the platform (not lent out and not earning interest), got back 100%. In my case, nearly all my assets on BlockFi were on the lending platform, earning juicy interest. For that class of assets, only a partial recovery is expected. Also, BlockFi will only send to you the crypto (e.g. Bitcoin or USDC) you owned as the crypto coin itself, not as the liquidated dollar value.

Therefore, you must establish an outside crypto wallet, and give them the external wallet address, so they can transfer the coin over a blockchain. This prospect of a connection between BlockFi (or its bankruptcy agent, Kroll) and your crypto wallet has brought out the scammers in force: if they can trick you into connecting them to your wallet, they can suck it dry in a flash.

The first thing I noticed back in early March was the proliferation of web sites that looked legit, but weren’t. When I browsed for “BlockFi withdrawal” or “BlockFi recovery,” up came a number of sites that had “BlockFi” or “Kroll” somewhere in their names, as clickbait. I don’t see any of these sites now, a month later. I assume that either those sites have been taken down as the thieves move onto the next heist, or the search engines have blotted them out.

Bogus phishing emails have also been sent out. Most insidious was an expertly-crafted email that I and other BlockFi customers received. Here is a screen shot of the now-infamous message:

As folks have pointed out, this looks pretty good. It has got the official company logo, and no misspellings. The return address on the email was BlockFi Holdings at www.everbridge.com. Unless you were vigilant, this address did not immediately raise suspicions like a random Gmail address or .ru address might.

Plus, this email was targeted to BlockFi customers, and came right when we were expecting further emails to tell us what steps to take to recovery our funds. How did the thieves have our email addresses? One speculation centers around the “Mother of All Breaches” (MOAB) when the Mailer Lite database was hacked in January. But we know that Kroll’s database was breached last year, where the lost data includes BlockFi customers’ names, email addresses, and amounts held at BlockFi, so that seems a more direct source.

Anyway, lots of BlockFi customers clicked on the link in this email. The thieves were pretty clever. First, they had you scrawl your signature on the screen. So now they have that archived, in order to do further ID theft mischief. And then, they had you connect their app to your wallet, as a trusted dApp. Over on Reddit (here and here), you can read the howls of pain from folks who got their wallets cleaned out. They are not alone – -as of late March, this scam had netted something like $5 million in digital assets.

An eerie thing about crypto is that the holdings at any address on the blockchain are public knowledge, even though you don’t know who the owner of that address is. So crypto sleuth Plumferno was able to display at least one of the BlockFi scammer’s wallets in the process of accumulating stolen assets:

This wallet (0x6C0e83422cD73fFD3A5EC4506638F6A0A8e22b38) currently holds well over $1million in Eth + various tokens combined, and as you can see, this scam is still very active – new victims are showing up in the transaction list quite regularly. Current holdings on Debank:

I am embarrassed to admit that I got taken in by this email. I tried clicking on the links, but fortunately my wallet was empty and my anti-malware resisted having me connect to the phishing site, so I did not lose any coin.  Some takeaways are:

( 1 ) Always be suspicious of emails; especially scrutinize the return address, to make sure it really is from a source you trust. Watch for almost-legit email addresses.

( 2 ) If at all possible, avoid clicking on links in emails; try to go to the actual company website and click links from there.

( 3 ) See ( 1 )

See here for the bittersweet ending to this saga (I did get some money back, but only 27% of my original funds at BlockFi).

Should Medicare Cover Anti-Obesity Drugs?

It seems like we finally have anti-obesity drugs that are effective and come without deal-breaking side effects: GLP-1 inhibitors like semaglutide (Wegovy). But they are currently priced over $10,000 per year for Americans. Should insurance cover them?

So far Medicare has decided to cover these drugs only to the extent that they treat diseases like diabetes (which these drugs were originally developed to treat) and heart disease (Wegovy reduces adverse cardiac events by 20% in overweight patients with heart disease). Just based on the diabetes coverage, Medicare was already spending $5 billion per year on these drugs in 2022, making semaglutide the 6th most expensive drug for Medicare with prescriptions still growing rapidly. The addition of other indications for specific diseases, like heart disease coverage added last month, is sure to expand this dramatically, especially if trials confirm other benefits.

But with almost 3/4 of Americans now officially overweight, weight loss makes for a bigger potential market than any specific disease. Medicare currently spends about 15k per beneficiary for all medical care; if they actually paid for an 11k/yr drug for 3/4 of their beneficiaries, their spending could rise to 23k per beneficiary per year. The effect on Medicare Part D, which covers prescription drugs and currently spends about 2.5k per beneficiary per year, would be even more dramatic, with spending quadrupling. This would blow a huge hole in the federal budget, where health insurance already accounts for about 1/4 of all spending (and Medicare 1/2 of that 1/4).

Of course, the reality would not be nearly that bad. Not all overweight people would want to take a weight loss drug, even if it were covered by insurance; the side effects are real. To the extent people do take the drugs, the reduction in obesity could lead to lower spending on treatments for things like heart attacks. Rebates can already reduce the cost of these drugs to be less than half of their list price, and Medicare may be able to negotiate even lower prices starting in 2027. Key patents will expire by 2033, after which generic competition should dramatically lower prices. Competition from other brand-name GLP-1 drugs could lower prices much sooner.

Patents always come with a tradeoff: they encourage innovation in the future, but mean high prices and under-use of patented goods today. The government does have one option for how to lower the marginal price of a drug without discouraging future innovation: just buy out the patent. This would likely cost hundreds of billions of dollars up front, but this could be recouped over time through lower spending, while bringing large health benefits because the drug would be much more widely used if it were sold at a price near its marginal cost of production.

Of course, for now supply of these medications is the bigger problem than the cost. Even with the current high prices and insurers tending not to cover drugs of weight loss alone, demand exceeds supply and shortages abound. The manufacturers are trying to ramp up production quickly to meet the large and growing demand, but this takes time. Insurers like Medicare covering weight loss drugs wouldn’t actually mean more people get the drugs in the short run, it would simply change who gets to use them.

But once production ramps up, I do expect that it will make sense for Medicare to cover weight loss drugs. The health benefits appear to be so large that the drugs are cost effective even at current prices, and prices are likely to fall substantially over time. The big restriction I suspect will still make sense is to require that patients be obese, rather than merely overweight, since being “merely” overweight (BMI 25-29) probably isn’t that bad for you:

Source

Disclosure: Long NVO

Update 4/18/24: I started thinking about this question because of an interview request from Janet Nguyen at Marketplace. She has now published an excellent article on the subject that also includes quotes from John Cawley of Cornell, who knows a lot more than I do on the subject.

Social Media, Mental Health, and Young People

What’s the connection between social media use and mental health, especially among young people? You’ve probably heard a lot about this recently, in the media, by politicians, and among friends chatting about their kids. Lots of assertions are made, but there is also a bit of research on this topic. As someone who frequently uses social media myself, as well as a parent of young children, and a teacher that works every week with young college students, I am particularly interested in this topic.

Jonathan Haidt and various co-authors have been trying to catalog all the research on the topic and figure out if there is a connection between the decline in teenage mental health and the rise of social media use. Haidt also has a new book on this topic, as well as the decline of “free play” among kids, which I have not yet read but I’ve looked through his documents that contain all of the underlying and summaries of the research he is citing. I’ll read the book soon, as I’m certainly part of the intended audience (see the last sentence of the above paragraph). And while this research is very much outside of my area of expertise, my training as an economist has taught me how to read academic papers and to be convinced by evidence, so once again I’m very much the intended audience on this score as well.

Please read this post as my attempt to understand the evidence and start to form conclusions and/or critique what Haidt is saying. It’s a work in progress, and I’ll write more as I read and think more about it.

Continue reading

It’s Not Too Late to Get Your Eclipse Glasses for the April 8 Solar Eclipse

Surely you have heard by now that a solar eclipse is coming. As the April 8 date approaches, the media/social media coverage will likely rise to a roar. I think we all know that the experience of being in the path of a total solar eclipse is eerie and memorable – – birds and insects can fall silent as night-like darkness falls, and a noticeable chill may be felt in the air.

Maps abound of the eclipse path across North America. For the U.S.,  it starts in Texas around 1:30 Central time, traverses southern Indiana and northern Ohio around 3:10 Eastern and ends in northern Maine about 3:30. Here is a snip I took from this NASA map, where I zoomed in the Midwest/Northeast section, and traced in red the lines of 90% totality:

If you really want the 100% experience, and if you want it to last the full four minutes, you must be in a relatively narrow strip. And if you want to have good chance of not having clouds obscure the fun, you may need to fly to central Texas. Buffalo, New York is in the middle of the eclipse path, but it is a notoriously overcast place.

But lots of folks, including residents of Chicago, Toronto, and the Boston-Washington corridor, live within the zone of (nearly) 90% totality, where you can see the moon sliding across most of the sun’s disk over the course of a few minutes, and experience significant darkening. The next solar eclipse to touch the U.S. will not be until 2044, and that will be barely visible from three less-populated states, Montana, North Dakota, and South Dakota.

So, I suggest you take the opportunity to enjoy this one to the max. This absolutely entails using special glasses with filters designed for safe viewing of the sun. Do not even think of looking at the sun without such glasses, and be alert lest children pick up the wrong cues and try to look at the sun.

The good news is that eclipse glasses are still available. I ordered some from Amazon a couple days ago that arrived two days later, and I saw them for sale in Lowe’s today. I got some extra to share with random friends and strangers. This can be a great chance to interact with neighbors and children.

The price per pair of glasses varies a lot, so do comparison shop.  I look for ones that say “CE and ISO Certified” like these. Be safe and have fun!

Notes on ChatGPT from Sama with Lex

This is a transcript of Lex Fridman Podcast #419 with Sam Altman 2. Sam Altman is (once again) the CEO of OpenAI and a leading figure in artificial intelligence. Two parts of the conversation stood out to me, and I don’t mean the gossip or the AGI predictions. The links in the transcript will take you to a YouTube video of the interview.

(00:53:22) You mentioned this collaboration. I’m not sure where the magic is, if it’s in here or if it’s in there or if it’s somewhere in between. I’m not sure. But one of the things that concerns me for knowledge task when I start with GPT is I’ll usually have to do fact checking after, like check that it didn’t come up with fake stuff. How do you figure that out that GPT can come up with fake stuff that sounds really convincing? So how do you ground it in truth?

Sam Altman(00:53:55) That’s obviously an area of intense interest for us. I think it’s going to get a lot better with upcoming versions, but we’ll have to continue to work on it and we’re not going to have it all solved this year.

Lex Fridman(00:54:07) Well the scary thing is, as it gets better, you’ll start not doing the fact checking more and more, right?

Sam Altman(00:54:15) I’m of two minds about that. I think people are much more sophisticated users of technology than we often give them credit for.

Lex Fridman(00:54:15) Sure.

Sam Altman(00:54:21) And people seem to really understand that GPT, any of these models hallucinate some of the time. And if it’s mission-critical, you got to check it.

Lex Fridman(00:54:27) Except journalists don’t seem to understand that. I’ve seen journalists half-assedly just using GPT-4. It’s-

Sam Altman(00:54:34) Of the long list of things I’d like to dunk on journalists for, this is not my top criticism of them.

As EWED readers know, I have a paper about ChatGPT hallucinations and a paper about ChatGPT fact-checking. Lex is concerned that fact-checking will stop if the quality of ChatGPT goes up, even though no one really expects the hallucination rate to go to zero. Sam takes the optimistic view that humans will use the tool well. I suppose that Altman generally holds the view that his creation is going to be used for good, on net. Or maybe he is just being a salesman who does not want to publicly dwell on the negative aspects of ChatGPT.

I also have written about the tech pipeline and what makes people shy away from computer programming.

Lex Fridman(01:29:53) That’s a weird feeling. Even with a programming, when you’re programming and you say something, or just the completion that GPT might do, it’s just such a good feeling when it got you, what you’re thinking about. And I look forward to getting you even better. On the programming front, looking out into the future, how much programming do you think humans will be doing 5, 10 years from now?

Sam Altman(01:30:19) I mean, a lot, but I think it’ll be in a very different shape. Maybe some people will program entirely in natural language.

Someday, the skills of a computer programmer might morph to be closer to the skills of a manager of humans, since LLMs were trained on human writing.

In my 2023 talk, I suggested that programming will get more fun because LLMs will do the tedious parts. I also suggest that parents should teach their kids to read instead of “code.”

The tedious coding tasks previously done by humans did “create jobs.” I am not worried about mass unemployment yet. We have so many problems to solve (see my growing to-do list for intelligence). There are big transitions coming up. Sama says GPT-5 will be a major step up. He claimed that one reason OpenAI keeps releasing intermediate models is to give humanity a heads up on what is coming down the line.

Recovering My Frozen Assets at BlockFi, Part1. How Sam Bankman-Fried’s Fraud Cost Me.

Back in 2021, interest rates had been so low for so long that that seemed to be the new normal. Yields on stable assets like money market funds were around 0.3% (essentially zero, and well below inflation), as I recall. As a yield addict, I scratched around for a way to earn higher interest, while sticking with an asset where (unlike bonds) the dollar value would stay fairly stable.

It was an era of crypto flourishing, and so I latched onto the notion of decentralized finance (DeFi) lending. I found what seemed to be a reputable, honest company called BlockFi, where I could buy stablecoin (constant dollar value) crypto assets which would sit on their platform. They would lend them out into the crypto world, and pay me something like 9 % interest. That was really, really good money back then, compared to 0.3%.

On this blog, I chronicled some of my steps in this journal. First, in signing up for BlockFi, I had to allow the intermediary company Plaid complete access to my bank account. Seriously, I had to give them my username and password, so they could log in as me, and not only be able to withdraw all my funds, but see all my banking transactions and history. That felt really violating, so I ended up setting up a small auxiliary bank account for Plaid to use and snoop to their heart’s content.

I did get up and running with BlockFi, and put in some funds and enjoyed the income, as I happily proclaimed (12/14/2021) on this blog, “ Earning Steady 9% Interest in My New Crypto Account “.

BlockFi assured me that they only loaned my assets out to “Trusted institutional counterparties” with a generous margin of collateral. What could possibly go wrong?

What went wrong is that BlockFi as a company got into some close relationship with Sam Bankman-Fried’s company, FTX.  Back in 2021-2022, twenty-something billionaire Sam Bankman-Fried (“SBF”) was the whiz kid, the visionary genius, the white knight savior of the crypto universe. In several cases, when some crypto enterprise was tottering, he would step in and invest funds to stabilize things. This reminded some of the role that J. P. Morgan had played in staving off the financial panics of 1893 and 1907. SBF was feted and lauded and quoted endlessly.

For reasons I never understood, BlockFi as a company was having a hard time turning a profit, so I think the plan was for FTX to acquire them. That process was partway along, when the great expose’ of SBF as a self-serving fraudster occurred at the end of 2022. He effectively gambled with his customers’ money. This would have made him even richer if his bets had paid off, but they went sour, which brought everything crashing down.

FTX quickly declared bankruptcy, which forced BlockFi to go BK as well. SBF was eventually locked up, but so were the funds I had put into BlockFi. The amount was not enough to threaten my lifestyle, but it was enough to be quite annoying.

Sam’s parents are both law professors at Stanford who are now resisting returning to FTX’s creditors the  $32 million (!!!) in assets (cash and real estate) that SBF had given them out of FTX’s operations. Some of that $32 million they are hoarding is mine, since BlockFi needs to recover its claims against FTX in order to make BlockFi clients whole. Sam’s mother has denounced the legal judgment against her son as “as “McCarthyite” and a “relentless pursuit of total destruction,” which is enabled by “a credulous public.” One wonders what little Sammy imbibed in the way of practical ethics in that household of idealistic Stanford law professors – the “effective altruism” that the Bankman-Fried family touts is perhaps a gratifying concept, until it actually costs you something you don’t want to part with. But I digress.

BlockFi Assets Begin to Thaw

I got emails from BlockFi every few months, assuring customers that they would do what they could to return our assets. Their bankruptcy proceedings kept things locked, but now they are starting to return some money. A judge ruled in early 2023 that assets held by users in their BlockFi “wallet” belonged to the users and could be withdrawn. However, assets in the interest-bearing account (which is where my stablecoin was) technically still belong to the bankrupt company’s estate, and were not necessarily available for withdrawal. But now, following another legal agreement,  BlockFi is returning funds from the interest accounts. The problem is that you will only get some fraction of what you put in. Some YouTube commenters have complained they only got 10-25% of their assets, and no one seems to know if they will ever get more. Ouch.

I got an email from BlockFi saying that I have assets to claim, but I need to set up an actual independent crypto wallet to receive them. BlockFi will only transfer the actual coin, not the dollar values. So, I am in the middle of this process. It’s one thing to open a wallet, where you can transfer crypto coins in and out. It is another to exchange or monetize your coin; for that you seem to need an exchange.

I have chosen to go with Coinbase. It is not the cheapest alternative, but it seems to be the most solid U.S. based crypto exchange. I have opened a Coinbase account now. As with BlockFi, I had to go through Plaid (ugh) for the connection to my bank account.

Next thing I need to do is to open a Coinbase wallet, and try to connect with BlockFi, and see what I get back. I will post later on what happens there.

Update: I got scammed in this process, see here. My bad for clicking on a link in an email, instead of going to the official website for the link…