6 comments

  • Wingman4l7 3 hours ago
    Long overdue. At some point, these scam operations are so large that they have to be operating with tacit approval of their host countries, who have been given no incentive to stop the virtual cold war against the personal finances of foreign citizenry that is bringing in millions of dollars into their economy.
    • JumpCrisscross 3 hours ago
      > the virtual cold war against the personal finances of foreign citizenry

      Comparing a scam to war is inaccurate. The Cold War was a war running cold with the potential to go hot. Cambodia and America are not going to war over this.

      • bobthepanda 1 hour ago
        Interestingly enough, China is thought to have leaned on the scales in Myanmar’s civil conflict due to pig-butchering there. (Not only were they scamming Chinese, they were also human trafficking them to operate the scams.)
      • nicechianti 2 hours ago
        [dead]
      • greenchair 2 hours ago
        that's a pretty naive view of war. we are at war with many countries all the time, most of it is cold.
        • JumpCrisscross 2 hours ago
          > we are at war with many countries all the time, most of it is cold

          Like whom? We (and let's be honest, every other great power) are at war with many countries all of the time, and while they may be cold for long stretches, they absolutely (a) go hot from time to time and (b) are constantly threatening to go hot.

  • Animats 3 hours ago
    DOJ press release.[1] DOJ claims custody of US$15 billion in Bitcoin. "Largest forfeiture action in the history of the Department of Justice."

    [1] https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/chairman-prince-group-indicte...

  • Dachande663 4 hours ago
  • kenjackson 3 hours ago
    From this article they got $15B (https://www.cnbc.com/2025/10/14/bitcoin-doj-chen-zhi-pig-but...). At what point do you say, "That's enough money?" Did they think the scam was going to go on forever?
    • mothballed 3 hours ago
      I'm not sure if one can merely walk away from a criminal enterprise of that size. As soon as you stop paying certain people you end up in a cage, and unless the stream of money is constant there is no reason to just not reneg on all prior agreements and go in a cage for stuff you already paid authorities off for.
      • JumpCrisscross 3 hours ago
        > As soon as you stop paying certain people you end up in a cage

        You end up dead because your co-conspirators don't want to end up in a cage.

      • dgfitz 2 hours ago
        So the whole crypto anonymity thing isn’t actually real? As it turns out, tracing people is still easier than tracing money? Decentralized economies are run by criminal enterprises?! We aren’t safe!?!

        Wonder how this whole concept overlays onto LLMs, with a lot more money on the line and a lot less regulation.

        • wmf 2 hours ago
          You're probably joking, but even if crypto was totally anonymous, running a massive criminal human trafficking empire in the real world is very non-anonymous.
        • dotnet00 2 hours ago
          Crypto anonymity is still possible if you don't plan to spend your ill-gotten millions or billions particularly quickly. But, of course, you don't get to having a massive active criminal empire that way.
    • verteu 2 hours ago
      At that scale, you have massive influence within the Cambodian government, so you're not worried about "getting caught" in the traditional sense.
    • apnsngr 1 hour ago
      These scams have enormous scale. The Economist has a fascinating podcast about it. The full series requires a subscription, but it is worth at least listening to the first 3 free episodes. https://www.economist.com/audio/podcasts/scam-inc
    • al_borland 1 hour ago
      Had they thought $1B was enough they would have missed out on $14B.
  • mrandish 1 hour ago
    Sounds like good news but the press release doesn't detail how the FBI managed to trace, positively identify and then seize such a huge pile of crypto ($15B) from a suspect they say took extensive steps to launder and hide the source and ownership of the crypto. I'm curious because this guy is clearly very experienced, highly sophisticated and located in a country where the government and law enforcement are obviously tacitly protecting him.

    So did the U.S. hack this guy? Anyone who manages to build such a massive multi-national corporation with myriad illicit businesses but also dozens of legitimate businesses with thousands of employees - including a large bank with over 100,000 customers - and then operate it all for over a decade, doesn't strike me as someone who's trivially careless. I mean he managed to successfully protect that much money for a long time from his own criminal co-conspirators (who would certainly include hackers with insider knowledge of his operations), criminal competitors and all the people he was bribing like senior Cambodian politicians, law enforcement and intelligence agencies.

    This just strikes me as either a very lucky break or a perhaps a sign that the FBI is adopting a new playbook to go after shielded international operations like this. Like maybe involving U.S. and 'Five Eyes' intelligence assets.

  • tnt128 1 hour ago
    Would these money be returned to the victims?
    • mothballed 1 hour ago
      Why would the government bother prosecuting/seizing it if the money was going to the victims?