Live data from Hacker News

Elizabeth Holmes found guilty

axios.com

711–720 of 1001 posts

Re: Elizabeth Holmes found guilty

#711
post #577

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

I would be fairly surprised. If only because, again, this is fraud and lands you in jail .

It happens more than you think, in many cases it’s easier to just sweep under the rug and move on. Few VCs want to admit they were swindled, and even fewer want the industry perception that they get founders investigated for fraud when things go sideways.

Theranos was unique in both the scale of the fraud and how non-investors were potentially harmed. Most of these are just founders who knowingly or unknowingly get in over their head and then basically walk away after having lied about the state of things.

I’ve heard a bunch of stories from VC friends, but the one I was the most involved with directly was probably 10 years ago. My mom mentioned to me that she had been chatting with some senior local government official who mentioned they had a startup datacenter provider taking over a nearby abandoned office complex and converting it to a green datacenter, bringing hundreds of jobs to the area - had I heard of them?

I had not, and after some digging determined that the company had claimed to have a bunch of unique technology, and leveraged that to get preferential terms from the local government - free rent, no property or payroll taxes, and other cash- and non-cash concessions. They had also raised millions from private investors by saying they had active datacenters with customers and they needed money to expand.

Except none of it was true. They had no customers, no datacenters, no employees other than the three founders and one of their daughters. They had made commitments in three different locations over the past three years to build a datacenter while simultaneously raising money by saying they ALREADY had active datacenters and customers.

I shared this with my mom, who shared it with local government, who hand waved it away as nonsense. But nothing ever happened at any of these sites, and after they ran through the money they filed for bankruptcy with revenue of $0 and assets of ~$12k. Their biggest investor took control of their land lease from the local government. Some investors complained online about being lied to, and the local government quietly swept it under the rug. I spoke with a local business reporter who basically shrugged and said, “yup, you’re right, but no one wants to talk about it”.

Re: Elizabeth Holmes found guilty

#712

These days, whenever someone is being presented as an absolute villain (as in the case of Holmes), comments sections tend to have not a few posts about how the things they’ve done, from a different vantage point, are understandable, or morally ambiguous and not objectively evil, or even amoral. I’m completely opposed to what she has done, but could there be any reason why we all seem to be unanimous that she is objec…

While the case against her was about defrauding investors, a strong case could also be made that, for the sake of her own wealth, fame, and success (she notably wanted to be "the next Steve Jobs"), she defrauded anybody looking for medical assistance.

Fucking around with people's health just to get rich and famous is evil.

Re: Elizabeth Holmes found guilty

#713

On the subject of lying tech CEOs, will Musk ever pay for his sins? "I feel very confident predicting 1 million autonomous robo-taxis for Tesla next year" - E. Musk 2019 Did he ever atone for this, or is he still kicking the can down the road? Edit: I know, I know... It's not a crime until it is. Let a jury decide if Musk lied, or if he genuinely believed that his company was capable of producing 1 million robotaxis…

There's a whole thing at work here that basically goes to credibility and obvious intention. I don't know anybody who hears Musk talk and thinks "that's a true statement." He's a circus barker. We might call him a bullshitter -- he's making a big noise, but nobody really thinks he means most of what he says. Musk has spent years building this persona, and so people generally treat him with the level of credibility he…

I don't think this would hold up in court, and I hope it wouldn't persuade a jury. One of the things that jumps out at me is that those two different perceptions, "circus barker" versus "deadly fucking serious", are highly subjective. Gender-biased, even. On of the things that women in STEM often complain about is our willingness to smile at a man being stern while shaking our heads at a woman acting that way. That's not to say I disagree with you in this instance; I actually see it the exact same way. Musk is a head-in-the-clouds showman type while Holmes was sober and stoic. I just wouldn't trust myself to make an actual ruling based on those perceptions, and I'd hope our legal system doesn't either.

The real difference between the two that I see is that Musk's borderline-fraudulent statements are intermingled with true statements about the actual companies he operates and the actual things they do. That's what buys you some slack to make outlandish statements: Accomplishing outlandish things. If Holmes had normalized electric cars or launched some reusable rockets, and had then staked (some of) the reputation of one of those companies on claims about a non-existent blood test, there may not have been a trial.

Re: Elizabeth Holmes found guilty

#714

On the subject of lying tech CEOs, will Musk ever pay for his sins? "I feel very confident predicting 1 million autonomous robo-taxis for Tesla next year" - E. Musk 2019 Did he ever atone for this, or is he still kicking the can down the road? Edit: I know, I know... It's not a crime until it is. Let a jury decide if Musk lied, or if he genuinely believed that his company was capable of producing 1 million robotaxis…

"I feel very confident" - well you can't sue somebody for his feelings ...

Re: Elizabeth Holmes found guilty

#715
The relevant detail, in my mind, is not whether Holmes deserves punishment, or even how much. The relevant detail is how the judge ultimately sentences Holmes, and more importantly, on what basis the judge selects the upper or lower range of possible sentencing outcomes. Considering that BS, stretching of capabilities, and so on are commonplace in the startup world, the point isn't whether Holmes crossed the line (she did), but rather, how exactly that line is repositioned by this precedent.

There's the easy story: "Young, ambitious wunderkind founder falls from grace." And the hard story: "Here's what might be relevant for future founders."

Re: Elizabeth Holmes found guilty

#716

On the subject of lying tech CEOs, will Musk ever pay for his sins? "I feel very confident predicting 1 million autonomous robo-taxis for Tesla next year" - E. Musk 2019 Did he ever atone for this, or is he still kicking the can down the road? Edit: I know, I know... It's not a crime until it is. Let a jury decide if Musk lied, or if he genuinely believed that his company was capable of producing 1 million robotaxis…

Being wrong about a prediction, even being very wrong, is not the same as lying or defrauding. By 2019 pretty much everyone knows that Musk is a person who makes extremely ambitious predictions, projections, timelines, etc, and tries to meet them. Almost anyone in that situation will have a low hit rate. There's no sin to pay for, this is how he chooses to work and structure his businesses. Investors tend to be very…

What about making a prediction while being, as you're saying it, 95% sure its bullshit?

Is that not lying? When does it become lying, when you're 100% sure you're not saying the truth?

Re: Elizabeth Holmes found guilty

#717
post #413

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Very little is known of Mr. Balwani, including why he is called “Sunny.” This might be because Saturday in Hindi and other Indian languages is “sunny-var”, and the day of the week you are born on is a common nickname, in conjunction with “sunny” being an easy to pronounce and common English word.

I am Indian and I've never heard the "day of the week as nickname" thing. Nicknames are generally shortened first names or (in hindu cases) based on some astrological calculations that are too detailed to explain here.

> ... or (in hindu cases) based on some astrological calculations that are too detailed to explain here.

I feel cheated. I got my nickname because my baby sister couldn't pronounce my name correctly.

Re: Elizabeth Holmes found guilty

#718

Count one of conspiring to commit wire fraud against investors in Theranos between 2010 and 2015: Guilty. Count two of conspiring to commit wire fraud against patients who paid for Theranos’s blood testing services between 2013 and 2016: Not guilty. Count three of wire fraud in connection with a wire transfer of $99,990 on or about Dec. 30, 2013: No verdict. Count four of wire fraud in connection with a wire transfer…

No post body was provided.

Re: Elizabeth Holmes found guilty

#719

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you talking about twitter commenters or news organizations? Provide samples please.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/15/opinion/elizabeth-holmes-...

That's an opinion piece that still even states "She should be held accountable for her actions as chief executive of Theranos."

Are there any actual articles with the message the op is suggesting?

Re: Elizabeth Holmes found guilty

#720

The relevant detail, in my mind, is not whether Holmes deserves punishment, or even how much. The relevant detail is how the judge ultimately sentences Holmes, and more importantly, on what basis the judge selects the upper or lower range of possible sentencing outcomes. Considering that BS, stretching of capabilities, and so on are commonplace in the startup world, the point isn't whether Holmes crossed the line (sh…

The worst possible outcome of this, and I hope clarification presses this, would be "You can't lie and bend the truth in biology startups, but can everywhere else."

Which would effectively siphon money away from an already hard but critical space.

The jury found Holmes guilty. But she should have been found just as guilty if she'd been running an adtech startup or a crypto company.

Post reply on HN