Elizabeth Holmes found guilty • Hacker News Board

Re: Elizabeth Holmes found guilty

#511

Post by gkoberger » Tue, Jan 04, 2022, 6:14 AM UTC

jcranmer wrote: post #328

jonwachob91 wrote: post #40

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…

It's not particularly surprising, if you assume that the jury was essentially looking for a specific, traceable line between representations from Elizabeth Holmes herself (and nobody else) and the subsequent payment as a necessary element of fraud. (Whether or not the jury was doing so could be guessed from reading the jury instructions, which I haven't done). Being found guilty of defrauding investors in that light…

I agree with everything you said, but I think the person you're replying to is less upset at the prosecutors/jury, and more upset about the laws in the first place. They protect the rich and powerful, and don't worry about the average person getting hurt.

Re: Elizabeth Holmes found guilty

#512

Post by chrononaut » Tue, Jan 04, 2022, 6:14 AM UTC

For those wanting to see the Theranos story as it unfolded from HN's perspective, here's a summary of some of the major threads over the years until early 2016:

- 2013/09/08 - Theranos (theranos.com): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6349349 (113 comments)

- 2014/06/26 - This CEO is out for blood (fortune.com): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7951019 (97 comments)

- 2015/04/26 - Scientists skeptical about Theranos blood test (businessinsider.com): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9440595 (94 comments)

- 2015/07/03 - FDA approves Theranos test for HSV-1 (fortune.com): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9823638 (24 comments)

- 2015/09/21 - How Playing the Long Game Made Elizabeth Holmes a Billionaire (inc.com) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10252183 (82 comments)

- 2015/10/15 - Theranos Has Struggled with Blood Tests (wsj.com): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10391313 (87 comments)

- 2015/10/16 - Theranos Dials Back Lab Tests at FDA's Behest (wsj.com): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10397149 (86 comments)

- 2015/10/18 - Theranos Trouble: A First Person Account (mondaynote.com): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10408811 (45 comments)

- 2015/10/27 - Theranos didn't work with the huge drug company it supposedly made money from (theverge.com): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10459905 (113 comments)

- 2015/10/28 - The FDA's notes from its visit to Theranos' labs don't look good (businessinsider.com): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10462678 (97 comments)

- 2015/10/29 - Theranos, Facing Criticism, Says It Has Changed Board Structure (nytimes.com): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10471152 (65 comments)

- 2015/12/20 - "Theranos Founder Faces a Test of Technology, and Reputation" (nytimes.com) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10765562 (102 comments)

- 2015/12/28 - "At Theranos, Many Strategies and Snags" (wsj.com) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10799261 (126 comments)

- 2016/01/25 - "Problems Found at Theranos Lab" (wsj.com) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10965167 (76 comments)

- 2016/01/27 - "The letter the Feds sent to Theranos" (vox-cdn.com) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10983747 (192 comments)

Re: Elizabeth Holmes found guilty

#513

Post by amitport » Tue, Jan 04, 2022, 6:15 AM UTC

Shacklz wrote: post #502

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #492

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Argh! The linked NPR article on that tweet had me yelling at my phone: > 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 f…

> No, Theranos was outright, egregious fraud, and most startups that "collapse under the weight of unrealized promises" are not committing fraud. Most startups don't get the traction and publicity that Theranos got, however. I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of founders would go to similar lengths given the chance; they just happen to have someone apply some reality check on them before things get out of hand.

Look, there is still a big jump from the usual founder sharing partial vague optimistic statments (e.g., "our algorithm is great"), to the not so common direct lie (e.g., "we tested it with statistical significance, it works, here you can see these results on these real world inputs", while completely faking the results)

Re: Elizabeth Holmes found guilty

#514

Post by hn_throwaway_99 » Tue, Jan 04, 2022, 6:18 AM UTC

hooande wrote: post #355

neom wrote: post #136

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…

No. It's one thing to say "My company is going to change the world" or "I am the best president of all time". It's different to repeatedly make a claim that is verifiably untrue, like "I have perfected cold fusion" or "I have a cure for all forms of cancer". The average startup founder doesn't do this, no sane person does this. > "The saddest thing of it all to me is that she was onto something, people are having suc…

Exactly. Many of her ideas are physically impossible because there is good evidence capillary blood isn't homogeneous enough to give accurate results for quantitative tests at the volumes Holmes was touting.

Re: Elizabeth Holmes found guilty

#515

Post by kingcharles » Tue, Jan 04, 2022, 6:19 AM UTC

ghostbrainalpha wrote: post #147

sharkweek wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I try my best to only procure swag that was actually distributed by the company at time of operation. As an example, you can buy "joke" Enron t-shirts, which I wouldn't be interested in, but some authentic team building event-specific shirt distributed to 50ish people? Oh baby, I'm all ears. I think that's part of the fun, hunting for the original stuff.

Can you guys share your collection? I'm not a part of this hobby yet, but I'm immediately on board. Would you be interested in an unreleased "Cosby Show" lego set that was supposed to come out right before he got cancelled?

> Would you be interested in an unreleased "Cosby Show" lego set that was supposed to come out right before he got cancelled?

Can't tell if serious. If serious, was this out of Lego Ideas (Cuusoo)? [I worked on the Back to the Future DeLorean set with the designers in Denmark]

Re: Elizabeth Holmes found guilty

#516

Post by abosley » Tue, Jan 04, 2022, 6:19 AM UTC

jonwachob91 wrote: post #40

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…

Go research wire fraud.

Re: Elizabeth Holmes found guilty

#517

Post by andi999 » Tue, Jan 04, 2022, 6:20 AM UTC

Could anybody explain why this is wire fraud and not normal fraud?

Re: Elizabeth Holmes found guilty

#518

Post by amirkdv » Tue, Jan 04, 2022, 6:21 AM UTC

harha wrote: post #349

jonwachob91 wrote: post #40

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.

Except for PCR has been around for decades and its basic principles are taught in first year molecular biology courses.

Whereas Theranos' newfangled secret "innovation" was ... well, a secret throughout.

Re: Elizabeth Holmes found guilty

#519

Post by vxNsr » Tue, Jan 04, 2022, 6:22 AM UTC

Shacklz wrote: post #502

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #492

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Argh! The linked NPR article on that tweet had me yelling at my phone: > 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 f…

> No, Theranos was outright, egregious fraud, and most startups that "collapse under the weight of unrealized promises" are not committing fraud. Most startups don't get the traction and publicity that Theranos got, however. I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of founders would go to similar lengths given the chance; they just happen to have someone apply some reality check on them before things get out of hand.

That fruit juicer company over promised and under delivered, wasn't fraud tho.

Re: Elizabeth Holmes found guilty

#520

Post by InfiniteRand » Tue, Jan 04, 2022, 6:24 AM UTC

TheCondor wrote: post #303

jonwachob91 wrote: post #40

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…

Are Walgreen's customers given any sort of guarantee about the results? I mean, if you could find someone that experience material loss from it, or death, I think they'd have a very legitimate chance to sue. It's not clear to me what promises Walgreen's is actually making though.

How does it work in a case where the customer's relationship is with a reseller, but the reseller was given false information from the test maker? Is only the test maker liable, or are both the reseller and test maker liable?