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

U.S. Files Criminal Charges Against Theranos’s Elizabeth Holmes, Ramesh Balwani

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

421–430 of 533 posts

Re: U.S. Files Criminal Charges Against Theranos’s Elizabeth Holmes, Ramesh Balwani

#421

Post by xcccccc »

briandear wrote: post #256
atombender wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This interview with John Carreyrou [1], the Wall Street Journal journalist who is largely responsible for exposing Theranos, goes into a lot of detail. It's long, so if you want a shorter answer, jump to the question "What technology did Theranos actually develop?": Basically there were three iterations of the technology. The first one used microfluidics, which are basically the repurposing of the micro-fabrication t…

Except, unlike Jobs, she couldn’t actually execute. The Jobs distortion field wasn’t a parlor trick, he was able to actually create the reality. Holmes was unlike Jobs in every way other than in her own mind. Look at all of the products that came from Jobs’s distortion field. Look at the wasteland of false promises resulting from Theranos. She was selling lemonade and calling it vodka.

Jobs got other people to create for him while taking the credit, again using his distortion field.

Re: U.S. Files Criminal Charges Against Theranos’s Elizabeth Holmes, Ramesh Balwani

#422

Post by stealthmodeclan »

Fnoord wrote: post #401
zebnyc wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you going to say that to the founders of reddit & airbnb?

I do, and the "fake it until you make it" doesn't fly very well in Europe; its generally frowned upon. Which also explains why there isn't much of a "startup culture" in Europe.

Which also explains why there isn't much of a "startup culture" in Europe.

Europe doesn't reward winners. So Europeans move to the US for their startups.

Do you know Europe is the largest buyer of the US securities? They surely feel compelled enough to benefit from the business scene in the US.

Re: U.S. Files Criminal Charges Against Theranos’s Elizabeth Holmes, Ramesh Balwani

#423

Post by avip »

bklaasen wrote: post #400
icelancer wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> The short answer is her Jobs-like "reality distortion field" -- she was exceedingly good at convincing non-scientists that their science worked. This confuses a lot of people (not saying you are one of them), but this is really common in intelligent non-experts. People vastly overestimate how intelligent they are when they place value on their intelligence; in other words, they like thinking they are smart. When t…

Is there a name for this cognitive bias?

Subclass of Illusory superiority.

Re: U.S. Files Criminal Charges Against Theranos’s Elizabeth Holmes, Ramesh Balwani

#424

Post by occamrazor »

celticninja wrote: post #413
astura wrote: post #411

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So? What is stopping someone who loses their license from just driving anyway? They've already shown not to give a shit, so they'll continue driving without a license. My dad lost his license many years ago and never stopped driving. He gets arrested once in a while, doesn't stop him.

Then your father is a selfish individual. If he isn't licensed then he isn't insured. If he caused an accident, even without causing injury or death, he could still make someone else's life incredibly difficult.

Not sure in which country you live. Since the GP talks about the UK, It is good to remid that in the EU/EFTA victims of traffic accident are always entitled to compensation from a state fund, even if the driver or the vehicle is uninsured.

Re: U.S. Files Criminal Charges Against Theranos’s Elizabeth Holmes, Ramesh Balwani

#425

Post by jcadam »

dghughes wrote: post #303
mhneu wrote: post #238

Excellent news for American society. “The Chickenshit Club” by Eisinger recently explained why the lack of criminal charges had emboldened white collar crime. Basically, individuals need to have the risk of criminal charges if they do something very egregious - they need to have skin in the game. The US Justice Dept has in the past two decades largely only been fining corporations. And so companies estimate risk and…

Even speeding tickets or anything most normal people would find a burden are nothing to super rich. But making few days in jail mandatory is a major deterrent. Then again even people texting and driving are not swayed by fines. In my region of the world a $3,000 fine is not a deterrent to many people. I say jail time would change that attitude.

Compliance is not the goal of speeding tickets (at least in the US). You think local governments would be happy if everyone woke up one day and decided to begin fastidiously obeying all traffic laws?

Putting people in jail costs money and is hence undesirable, so unless you're drag racing through a school zone or driving drunk/stoned, you're not going to jail.

The view of governments in the US toward traffic enforcement as revenue-source was made clear during the Great Recession. When a lot of folks were struggling with unemployemnt, pay cuts/freezes, etc., and morale was generally in the toilet, local governments began jacking up speeding fines in order to make up for lost tax revenue. And people wonder why the relationship between citizens and LEOs in this country has become so antagonistic.

Re: U.S. Files Criminal Charges Against Theranos’s Elizabeth Holmes, Ramesh Balwani

#426

Post by vcfg »

astura wrote: post #411
tomxor wrote: post #404

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Even speeding tickets or anything most normal people would find a burden are nothing to super rich. I'm not sure how it works in your country but in the UK too many speeding tickets and you will loose your license. The exact number depends on the severity of each offence, but we get max of 12 points over 3 years [1] so they stick with you - repeat offenders are given even stricter rules after getting their license…

So? What is stopping someone who loses their license from just driving anyway? They've already shown not to give a shit, so they'll continue driving without a license. My dad lost his license many years ago and never stopped driving. He gets arrested once in a while, doesn't stop him.

That’s odd. Here driving without a licence is a crime and will land you in prison for sure if caught. Why would you have a licence if there are no consequences for not having it?

Re: U.S. Files Criminal Charges Against Theranos’s Elizabeth Holmes, Ramesh Balwani

#427

Post by detaro »

zebnyc wrote: post #264
paulie_a wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fake it until you make it is just a nice way of saying fraud. People that do that are being deceitful and should be publicly shamed and face criminal prosecution in some cases. They are scam artists, not honest entrepreneurs.

Are you going to say that to the founders of reddit & airbnb?

What did airbnb fake?

Reddit is an interesting case, but I'd say there's a categorical difference between faking that you are able to do something you can't (Theranos) and pre-filling a functioning site with content (I assume that's what you are referring to?).

It's especially relevant if the difference actually matters for whom you are tricking: If the results had been accurate (which from what I understand they weren't) and absent any other specific claims of superiority Theranos end-users wouldn't care about what tech they use, but for investors relying on claims that they can do something others can't to establish their value it obviously does matter.

Which in the case of reddit I guess makes the question: does it make a material difference for users if the site they enjoy is entirely fed by an organic community, or is the most important thing that the site is enjoyable regardless of origin? I guess you could argue that faking a community is also "faking that you are able to do something you can't".

Re: U.S. Files Criminal Charges Against Theranos’s Elizabeth Holmes, Ramesh Balwani

#428

Post by dawsmik »

save_ferris wrote: post #415
rayiner wrote: post #383

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Too bad the US can’t retrospectively prosecute bankers for 2008 and claw back their size-subsidized, low risk premium profits. The Theranos case clearly illustrates why. Fraud by the top executives of a company, who lied about what their technology can do to raise a bunch of money, and endangered patients in the process--that is a story you can explain to a jury. Even if you think there are "bankers" (curiously, yo…

>Even if you think there are "bankers" (curiously, you do not identify specific bankers) who broke the law, good luck explaining to a jury exactly what anyone did that was illegal. Prosecutors who investigated 2008 came away saying that there was no evidence of criminal intent, based on the fact that they didn't break or intend to break any laws in the process of making their really stupid bets. Preet Bharara, former…

I worked in the industry. Literally, there were employees of 7-11 who stated their income as $100,000 or more in order to qualify for a home loan. This type of fraud was rampant and known by everyone.

Re: U.S. Files Criminal Charges Against Theranos’s Elizabeth Holmes, Ramesh Balwani

#429

Post by misiti3780 »

spamizbad wrote: post #406
mhneu wrote: post #238

Excellent news for American society. “The Chickenshit Club” by Eisinger recently explained why the lack of criminal charges had emboldened white collar crime. Basically, individuals need to have the risk of criminal charges if they do something very egregious - they need to have skin in the game. The US Justice Dept has in the past two decades largely only been fining corporations. And so companies estimate risk and…

I'm curious about the "backlash" against the Enron verdict. I don't think there was any public sympathy for that company when it happened. Was the feeling of unfair justice largely concentrated in elite circles outside of the view of the public?

No, the result of the Enron verdict put Arthur Anderson (their consulting firm) out of business also. Only a small number of AA knew and participated in the fraud, but the thought is in retrospect, the government should not have punished all of the employees and the shareholders

Re: U.S. Files Criminal Charges Against Theranos’s Elizabeth Holmes, Ramesh Balwani

#430

Post by wgerard »

bitcharmer wrote: post #402
Trundle wrote: post #398

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As far as I remember the big short doesn't though.

Part of the premise behind writing the book was to explain to the public what happened and why. There are several good analogies in both the book and the movie (ie. the chef and the fish) that greatly helped me understand the mechanics of it.

The book and movie do a pretty solid job about explaining what CDOs, derivatives, etc. are.

What the book and movie don't do (unless I'm forgetting something) is explain how anything involved with the 2008 crisis was illegal - the sole exception being that CDSs are very arguably insurance contracts and should be regulated by insurance laws.

Post reply on HN