Live data from Hacker News

Elizabeth Holmes found guilty

axios.com

391–400 of 1001 posts

Re: Elizabeth Holmes found guilty

#391

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fake it all you want until your fakery harms innocent parties.

What's an example of a fakery that doesn't harm innocent parties? If you pretend a product (or a feature) that doesn't exist exists, then at the very least a competitor is unfairly harmed.

If a site like Reddit gets started by creating nonexistent or sock-puppet users, for instance, that's hardly on the same level as falsifying medical tests "just until we get the bugs sorted out."

Re: Elizabeth Holmes found guilty

#392
post #136

Question: could Holmes have avoided all of this by pivoting to something else and not losing investors money. It is extremely common for startups to exaggerate their tech just to later pivot to something else without any repercussions.

I followed the case very closely, read the transcripts I could find daily etc. What Elizabeth did wasn't far from what many many many founders do. This was held to a legal standard, sure, but let's be real here... since when was the legal standard the SV standard? Is SV really the bastion of morality and legal ethics? Is that the new norm, good behaviour? Notably some investors refused to participate and iirc Draper…

Underrated comment. The investors were investing in her because she was willing to take the risk of move fast and break things (where things in this case is the diagnostic accuracy of blood tests). She got nailed, ironically, not for hurting patients, but instead for harming the egos of the investors.

As a participant in the startup investment world you are willing Participant of SUSPENSION OF DISBELIEF. This is roughly equivalent speak for REALITY DISTORTION FIELD. The point is you as an investor are a willing participant in believing that something more is possible than what has already been achieved.

If you're a founder: you should be worried about being held to a legal standard of the representations and warranties. That section is in every share purchase agreement and it's the stuff that gets you sued. And sometimes, like in this case, it's WIRE FRAUD and it's criminal. Crazy. We need another section to replace REPS AND WARRANTIES.

Re: Elizabeth Holmes found guilty

#394
post #349

It blows my mind that she was found guilty for defrauding investors, but not guilty for defrauding patients about their test results. Investors know that every dollar they put into a company could disappear, it's why startups get capital from investors and not bank loans. But a patient does not expect for their blood test results to be completely wrong. Her tests weren't giving false-negatives or false-positives, the…

Makes me wonder how much of the rapidly established covid testing infrastructure around the world delivers actual results. Fun fact: In some places like Singapore you don't even get the chance to test again to verify the result, you just serve your time in quarantine and then get back your "safe" status.

At least in the last few months, at-home tests have been available to replicate lab results, and they seem to be consistent.

Re: Elizabeth Holmes found guilty

#395
post #375

Why isn’t she in jail right now? She’s doing at least a few years hopefully the full 80 but probably not.

Sentencing always happens at a later date after conviction to leave time for a post trial hearings so that the defence can raise their concerns etc.

Re: Elizabeth Holmes found guilty

#396

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They had a fully functional lab though, it just wasn't using Theranos' devices. This is what they did to Wallgreens, they sold them on the idea that they would have theranos machines in-store, but instead what they did was do IV blood draws (calling it a comparison check) .. and then would just process the samples the same way as everyone else using standard equipment. People were getting good results because Therano…

I believe they also reverse engineered a lot of the third party machines, in an attempt to make them work the way they wanted to. That's... that's bad.

Reverse engineering is an important right that is protected by centuries of patent and trade secret law in the US and many other countries. It's fundamental to innovation, even though non-innovative bad people like Theranos also do it.

Reverse engineering is not bad, and it is dismaying that someone posting on a site called "Hacker News" would think so.

Re: Elizabeth Holmes found guilty

#398
post #389

It blows my mind that she was found guilty for defrauding investors, but not guilty for defrauding patients about their test results. Investors know that every dollar they put into a company could disappear, it's why startups get capital from investors and not bank loans. But a patient does not expect for their blood test results to be completely wrong. Her tests weren't giving false-negatives or false-positives, the…

Didn’t the FDA approve her tests… Yup - https://www.businessinsider.com/theranos-gets-fda-approval-2...

That was just one test, for Herpes.

Re: Elizabeth Holmes found guilty

#399

It blows my mind that she was found guilty for defrauding investors, but not guilty for defrauding patients about their test results. Investors know that every dollar they put into a company could disappear, it's why startups get capital from investors and not bank loans. But a patient does not expect for their blood test results to be completely wrong. Her tests weren't giving false-negatives or false-positives, the…

Weren't they secretly testing blood samples with actual working machines?

Re: Elizabeth Holmes found guilty

#400

If she gets anything less than life in prison, it will effectively answer the question of "how many years of prison would you do for a billion dollars?". I'm guessing an absolute max of 5 in a minimum security white collar facility.

She didn’t personally clear or keep anything close to a billion dollars. It’s true that she was able to live a somewhat lavish, albeit clearly stressful, lifestyle for a while though…
Post reply on HN