the thing about the avi eisenberg case which might confuse onlookers is it only really makes sense as market manipulation under the crypto-exchanges-are-legitimate-regulated-exchanges theory
if crypto exchanges are casinos he's the guy who walks into the casino and makes millions off the house by counting cards.
under the build-financial-institutions-out-of-a-Hobbesian-state-of-nature theory he's operating on the law of the jungle.
Follow
this is re: the mango markets case some people seem to be claiming there are far more ethically questionable things he's done
