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

Elizabeth Holmes found guilty

axios.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

951–960 of 1001 posts

Re: Elizabeth Holmes found guilty

#951

Post by bener »

throwawaylinux wrote: post #263
Danieru wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's your job. Sellers are motivated to provide evidence. "I just have it lol" is not going to command much premium over your costs.

Yes that's hilarious but you're missing the interesting part. How does the seller provide convincing evidence that withstands scrutiny such that a diligent buyer would be satisfied that it is authentic then.

I would suggest checking some of the high value auctions and seeing what their proof is.

It would be trivial to prove you worked at a company if that's how you were given it, you might even have photos of an event where stuff was given out, emails detailing a "welcome pack", I'm guessing it's these sort of things that are used as proof.

Re: Elizabeth Holmes found guilty

#952

Post by Gatsky »

I just want to comment about her appearance, which I think has been carefully contrived during the trial. When she was CEO she dressed like Steve Jobs, had tightly bound hair and an intense look with an unwilling smile. During the trial she has let her hair down, dropped the turtlenecks and adopted a soft, perpetually distracted look. Maybe this reflects some inner transformation but I suspect none of it is accidental.

Re: Elizabeth Holmes found guilty

#953

Post by andreareina »

lokar wrote: post #902
geophile wrote: post #747

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think there is a pretty sharp line separating what Holmes tried, and what legitimate startups do. What she claimed had no basis in reality. It's Borat trying to patent a hoverboard, just like in Back to the Future, and telling the VC that he "needs to come up with the science" ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OXuDhejxz_c ). Except that Holmes was worse, claiming that she had the science. And she insulated herself…

Was there really no science at all? I've not followed the details, but I assumed she had something, but that it was just unworkable now or anytime soon

As I understand it a drop of blood is simply not large enough of a sample to get statistically reliable results.

Re: Elizabeth Holmes found guilty

#954

Post by cercatrova »

anthony_romeo wrote: post #830
AlbertCory wrote: post #829

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think there's a literal "conflict of interest" but there's definitely a "protect your friends" thing going on. Laura is from the rich Stanford/Menlo Park VC/Palo Alto crowd, and that's Holmes' base of support as well.

My main point from above: > I do get frustrated seeing these sorts of vague cynical quips levying *specific* accusations based more upon a gut plausibility of a scenario rather than a clear outline of information.

It really is amusing that you have to keep posting this comment as I don't think anyone gave you an actual answer to what you're asking for, even after you clarified that you wanted specific, concrete accusations rather than vague ones. It's like people are wanting to reply to you but keep simply glossing over what you wrote.

Re: Elizabeth Holmes found guilty

#955

Post by refurb »

user_7832 wrote: post #901
refurb wrote: post #325

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nobody said the US system was perfect, just better (along with other developed countries that have rule of law). I lived in a developing country for a while and the corruption can be maddening. You might agree to partner with someone to buy property, they take your money and cut you out. In corrupt countries, you might be entirely screwed - that person has too many connections and influence, nobody will touch them. A…

I agree, but also disagree. Look at the entire Epstein (and co.) trials - the rich and well connected are thoroughly protected across the world. Yes, it's more likely that you can hold people accountable but only to an extent. (Fwiw I'm from India so I'm familiar with the system, and I fully agree it's far from perfect)

How do you know the rich and well connect were protected? Do you know that other prosecutions aren't being planned?

Re: Elizabeth Holmes found guilty

#956

Post by geophile »

m3047 wrote: post #944
geophile wrote: post #747

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think there is a pretty sharp line separating what Holmes tried, and what legitimate startups do. What she claimed had no basis in reality. It's Borat trying to patent a hoverboard, just like in Back to the Future, and telling the VC that he "needs to come up with the science" ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OXuDhejxz_c ). Except that Holmes was worse, claiming that she had the science. And she insulated herself…

> It's Borat trying to patent a hoverboard Wow! That's interesting! While nobody has been paying attention, forward-looking patents have become acceptable (I don't agree that this is a good thing). Seriously, that's a fact; and here comes Holmes apparently claiming to have the science, am I right? There is language which apparently (IANAL) needs to be watched especially around verb tense when filing such patents.

Can you provide some examples?

Re: Elizabeth Holmes found guilty

#957

Post by volkanvardar »

For anyone interested in more detail and the full story, Bad Blood[1] by John Carreyrou is a really gripping book. It was also in Bill Gates' list in 2018[2][3].

[1] https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/37976541-bad-blood

[2] https://www.gatesnotes.com/about-bill-gates/holiday-books-20...

[3] https://www.gatesnotes.com/Books/Bad-Blood

Re: Elizabeth Holmes found guilty

#958

Post by CheezeIt »

WalterBright wrote: post #946
roelschroeven wrote: post #927

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Only hurt wealthy investors? What about people who received incorrect testing results, like the woman who was given a false-positive HIV result and the woman who was incorrectly told that she was miscarrying? https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2021/09/theranos-results... https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2021/11/theranos-gave-wo...

They certainly got a scare, but it's hard to see that they were harmed . Generally, when one gets a scary result from a test, another test is done to confirm.

The false negatives would have been a better example.

Re: Elizabeth Holmes found guilty

#960

Post by anshumankmr »

richardfey wrote: post #947
anshumankmr wrote: post #572

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who would want to use it?

I was thinking that it would make for a cool EvilCorp in a game story

Elizabeth Holmes and Theranos will likely be parodied. Hell, make a parody of her as a villain for Far Cry 7. Or if GTA VI really is in development, I bet a character like her will be featured somewhere.
Post reply on HN