Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

We Shouldn’t Be Surprised at the Theranos Fraud

nautil.us

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 257 posts

Re: We Shouldn’t Be Surprised at the Theranos Fraud

#121

Post by lhorie »

lomnakkus wrote: post #88
lhorie wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> come up with a framework to penalize misleading journalism, while at the same time, preserving the independence of media Why this obsession with penalizing people? Journalists might not know better. At some point one needs to take some responsibility in determining whether what they are consuming are actually reputable data sources or just cheap/free entertainment and hearsay, and one needs to realize that news out…

> Journalists might not know better. I don't understand why this would excuse anything. Journalism is almost literally their about to (get to) know better about things and explaining to the rest of us. At least, that's what it should be -- these days it seems to be mostly about generating clickbait. (Sorry if that's cynical -- I've just read Trust Me, I'm Lying.) > Ultimately, shouldn't everyone be applying critical…

> I don't understand why this would excuse anything

I don't see it as an excuse, just as an observation of reality. Journalists can be misled by their sources. They may misinterpret data or make mistakes. They can have ulterior motives, or they may see the world through different glasses than you/me (e.g. conservative/liberal oriented news outlets). They may be pressured by deadlines to put out subpar quality material. There's noise amplification and echo chambers due to the role of social media. There are many reasons average journalism today might not be up to some standards.

The way I tend to think of it is: trust but verify. Some things matter directly to my personal life and it's in my personal interest to verify that I have the correct information about them. Why then, should I trust the (possibly exaggerated) interpretation from some WSJ journalist on some recent research paper rather than doing my own homework?

News about Theranos at this point, for example, is not one of those things that directly affect me or my family, and the accuracy and outrage of this story is of only mild entertainment value to me. Recognizing that, I can choose to consume news about it with the implicit understanding that I'm probably getting sensationalized editorials with no more value to me than a random hollywood movie, and not some data source that I should be investigating.

Re: We Shouldn’t Be Surprised at the Theranos Fraud

#122

Post by AstralStorm »

cepth wrote: post #116
ChuckMcM wrote: post #64

It works both ways though, a lot of people said Tesla was a fraud and they couldn't build a "real" electric car with a range of 300 miles. And to the credit of the critics they weren't wrong, there was some serious integration of battery technology that had never been done before that made it possible for the Model S to exist. Not that I'm defending Theranos, they should have come out and said "We're running into iss…

I think the differentiator vs. Tesla is that Theranos promised things that are/were physically impossible. Putting aside Tesla's long history of delays, I think it's fair to say that the company has delivered on some of its core technological promises. Battery pack cost per kWh is close to dipping below $100, Tesla has dramatically reduced their use of rare earth metals in their packs, they've helped alleviate concer…

The latter points in robotics are solvable with very clever design (not a glue robot). The sampling issue is not, though.

Re: We Shouldn’t Be Surprised at the Theranos Fraud

#123

Post by krylon »

kumarvvr wrote: post #26

The most amazing thing about this whole situation is that there were experts in the field who were shouting out about the impossibility of Holmes' claims right from the beginning. The media, though, never paid enough attention (or was possibly subverted by Theranos itself) to the naysayers. These incidents ought to remind us the exponentially important role media plays in our lives and how important it is that we com…

> The media, though, never paid enough attention (or was possibly subverted by Theranos itself) to the naysayers.

Part of the problem, I think, is that the public loves (and wants to believe) the narrative of the lone genius who solves a problem against all the odds, and against all the people who told them they could not do it.

Re: We Shouldn’t Be Surprised at the Theranos Fraud

#124

Post by shub »

monkeypizza wrote: post #67
cowpig wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He gets credit for not doing something extremely unethical that would have been quite risky, probably stupidly so (because it would bring him into the controversy)?

If you don't give him credit for that, what would you give him credit for? If he stopped Carreyrou, you'd obviously blame him. Therefore in order for your judgement to be meaningful, you have to admit that him allowing Carreyrou to go ahead and topple the house of cards was a good action. Otherwise no matter what he does you judge him negatively - and in that case, your decision is predetermined and not of informatio…

Refraining from being horrible is not the same thing as doing something good.

Re: We Shouldn’t Be Surprised at the Theranos Fraud

#125

Post by kumarvvr »

krylon wrote: post #123
kumarvvr wrote: post #26

The most amazing thing about this whole situation is that there were experts in the field who were shouting out about the impossibility of Holmes' claims right from the beginning. The media, though, never paid enough attention (or was possibly subverted by Theranos itself) to the naysayers. These incidents ought to remind us the exponentially important role media plays in our lives and how important it is that we com…

> The media, though, never paid enough attention (or was possibly subverted by Theranos itself) to the naysayers. Part of the problem, I think, is that the public loves (and wants to believe) the narrative of the lone genius who solves a problem against all the odds, and against all the people who told them they could not do it.

This is where the problem is. Media should focus on facts. Not what the public loves.

Re: We Shouldn’t Be Surprised at the Theranos Fraud

#126

Post by saiya-jin »

jaypaulynice wrote: post #104
kumarvvr wrote: post #26

The most amazing thing about this whole situation is that there were experts in the field who were shouting out about the impossibility of Holmes' claims right from the beginning. The media, though, never paid enough attention (or was possibly subverted by Theranos itself) to the naysayers. These incidents ought to remind us the exponentially important role media plays in our lives and how important it is that we com…

This happens pretty often actually. The same early investors own the media companies so they get to push stories to get companies huge valuations. The media is there to make money too! One thing America lacks is public radio/tv whose goal is to serve the public. People keep forgetting that the media is private. Whoever controls the media controls the people.

well that's not panacea neither, since budget comes from government/state, and so with change of government leading directors are often changed too for 'a more compatible view'.

just look at post-soviet/eastern block media, we all have those (tv/radio) but nobody expects anymore true objectivity there.

Re: We Shouldn’t Be Surprised at the Theranos Fraud

#127

Post by transfire »

All the ballyhoo stunk to high heaven to me -- a case of "doth protest too much". So, my guess is the tech actually worked (even if not as perfect as originally hoped). And the company was destroyed by industry players via government regulation and a massive smear campaign -- and it worked like a charm. Ultimately they even murdered the lead scientist, faking his suicide, to ensure the truth is never known. The tech was simply too disruptive to the hand-over-fist $$$ in the industry, so it had to be put down.

And if you think that's crazy, you haven't read enough history.

Re: We Shouldn’t Be Surprised at the Theranos Fraud

#128

Post by sytelus »

The book Bad Blood is amazing and extremely gripping. The question, however, why Holmes did this is still open. The critical point to remember is that Holmes never sold her shares and in fact she kept accumulating more. She didn't need IQ of 150 to figure out that going live with erroneous medical devices would get her slammed with lawsuits from patients. If she just wanted to dup investors to become rich, she could have done it real easy by stepping aside, let someone inherit the mess and then selling her stack. In fact her board asked her to do just that before WSJ found out and she refused it. I have seen her plenty of talks/interviews and its super hard to believe she was working with malicious plan all along. Part of me wants to feel that her desire was genuine to some extent and she just hoped things would work out if she pulled lies and deception long enough to keep raising funds. She had lots of top tier advisors who have done exactly that to establish their own companies. I'm not defending her by any measure, she was classic bad manager with Balwani topping even her. There was a very little chance she could have actually ran talented team longer term - but this is precisely the part book conveniently leaves out.

Re: We Shouldn’t Be Surprised at the Theranos Fraud

#129

Post by zeth___ »

shub wrote: post #124
monkeypizza wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you don't give him credit for that, what would you give him credit for? If he stopped Carreyrou, you'd obviously blame him. Therefore in order for your judgement to be meaningful, you have to admit that him allowing Carreyrou to go ahead and topple the house of cards was a good action. Otherwise no matter what he does you judge him negatively - and in that case, your decision is predetermined and not of informatio…

Refraining from being horrible is not the same thing as doing something good.

Look at all the people I have not murdered today. Yes yesterday was a bit of a bad day with that school and everything but I should get some credit for today.

Re: We Shouldn’t Be Surprised at the Theranos Fraud

#130

Post by edanm »

jl2718 wrote: post #102
kumarvvr wrote: post #26

The most amazing thing about this whole situation is that there were experts in the field who were shouting out about the impossibility of Holmes' claims right from the beginning. The media, though, never paid enough attention (or was possibly subverted by Theranos itself) to the naysayers. These incidents ought to remind us the exponentially important role media plays in our lives and how important it is that we com…

My question is: where is the due diligence from investors? Nobody even bothers anymore. I’ve begun to think they don’t even care, because they truly believe that money makes success, not people, and certainly not technology.

That's absolutely wrong.

Remember - the reason Theranos is news is exactly because this doesn't happen often, and one of the reasons this doesn't happen often is that investors are usually smarter about their investments.

Post reply on HN