491–500 of 1001 posts
Here's the earliest HN submission I could find on Theranos: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6349349 I don't really blame folks for not calling it out as a fraud at that point, given how little information we had. There were, for what it's worth, a number of people who complained about the ambiguity of the website. But many were convinced that the illustrious board must mean good results. Well done to medman77 wh…
Time to kibitz on the likely sentence! You can get the federal sentencing guidelines here: https://www.ussc.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/guidelines-manu... They're long and mostly not relevant except for the sections pertaining to Holmes conduct. Here's the indictment: https://www.justice.gov/usao-ndca/page/file/1135066/download Holmes was found guilty of one 18 USC 1349 charge, and 3 18 USC 1343 charges; the 1343's s…
From former AUSA, and current white-collar defense attorney Ken White: "She faces a max of 65 years (3x20 + 1x5). And it's not at all clear she'll do less than 20." Apparently the sentences will not necessarily be served concurrently. https://twitter.com/Popehat/status/1478170494130003976?s=20
> It is unusual for tech executives to face criminal changes when their startups collapse under the weight of unrealized promises.
That's because it's not illegal to over promise about your future results. It is illegal to lie about simple facts regarding the present state of your business to attract funding.
I'm so sick of so many press outlets framing this as just "fake it til you make it" gone wrong, "a page from the Silicon Valley playbook", or that it's just an over hyped company take to extremes.
No, Theranos was outright, egregious fraud, and most startups that "collapse under the weight of unrealized promises" are not committing fraud.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But then you must charge all the employees who did so, instead of her. Her crime is fraud because she told investor one thing and commanded employees another. But it's not the army, they could refuse, they all did the tests and gave the false results back to humans, which is unfathomable in healthcare. She s eventually responsible but her job was on investor relationship.
> But it's not the army, they could refuse Officers are not only allowed to, but required to, refuse illegal orders in the Army. Enlisted troops are allowed the "just following orders" excuse, but not officers who should know better.
Within certain bounds; even enlisted can be convicted of crimes for following palpably unlawful orders.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hopefully she'll get more, SV could use a good example. Otherwise it signals that wantrepeneurs can keep doing it with minimal repercussions.
Ok I'm not American so perhaps my perspective is different... More than 10 years would be utterly barbaric. The 65 years mentioned in another comment chain would be well beyond the pale. I'm no fan of Holmes, but what good does it serve to lock up non violent criminals for decades?
We absolutely love throwing people in prison for ridiculous lengths of time, because we are, for the most part, violent busybodies.
This will sound weird but I am a collector of swag from large companies that have collapsed due to anything from mismanagement to outright fraud. While we're a rare breed there are others like me out there. Still, even with this oddly specific marketplace being small, let me tell you, the Theranos swag market is hot right now (check eBay if you're curious). Wish I had gone big on this one earlier, because I have a fe…
Time to kibitz on the likely sentence! You can get the federal sentencing guidelines here: https://www.ussc.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/guidelines-manu... They're long and mostly not relevant except for the sections pertaining to Holmes conduct. Here's the indictment: https://www.justice.gov/usao-ndca/page/file/1135066/download Holmes was found guilty of one 18 USC 1349 charge, and 3 18 USC 1343 charges; the 1343's s…
Skilling of Enron fame got 24 years and was released after 12. That seemed a far worse crime than Theranos IMHO.
That's because his original 24 year sentence was reduced to 14 after a Supreme Court case vacated part of his convictions.
My bet, based on some calculators I've seen, is that Holmes serves (actually in jail) 14-18 years.
It has been definitively admitted. Now we see the vultures tearing this fraudster apart and you what? That is good, and it is absolutely magnificent. Since many have gotten away with it, She is now the first of many that have been caught and need to be investigated and the other exit scams of this decade to be unveiled before the scammers race to the exit with a mountain of cash. So who is next?
If the global economy doesn't pick up soon we may see many more exposed. But next up I think wi be the Wirecard trial in Germany, if they find someone to prosecute
[0] https://www.tagesschau.de/wirtschaft/unternehmen/wirecard-ch...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Based on a very quick reading, I think the most serious offense (the $100M one) would at least land in the 97-121 months bucket. If she serves half of that, best case for her is 4 years. Not too bad.
Hopefully she'll get more, SV could use a good example. Otherwise it signals that wantrepeneurs can keep doing it with minimal repercussions.
I don't follow startups that closely. The only example I can think of is Elon Musk's "full self driving" promises, but the gap between promise and reality is a lot smaller in that case. Even then, the claims are still mostly future timelines, not "it works now, no I can't show you, trust me!!"
This will sound weird but I am a collector of swag from large companies that have collapsed due to anything from mismanagement to outright fraud. While we're a rare breed there are others like me out there. Still, even with this oddly specific marketplace being small, let me tell you, the Theranos swag market is hot right now (check eBay if you're curious). Wish I had gone big on this one earlier, because I have a fe…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
> people are having success with her ideas today Citation needed. The whole concept has a critical flaw, as pointed out by her engineering staff and medical advisors: blood tests require a certain minimum volume of blood to work, and that's inescapable because blood components are discrete, not continuous. For example, a drop of blood is about .05mL, or about 1/20th of a milliliter. A common testing sample size in a…