131–140 of 401 posts
SBF, his foundation and his family are well connected politically. NYT already did a bizarro puff piece on him, now Vox does this (which apparently directly received FTX foundation money). It’s absurd as he is essentially a well connected criminal. edit I do want to correct one thing - this is not a puff piece like the NYT one, actually it implicates him.
SBF, his foundation and his family are well connected politically. NYT already did a bizarro puff piece on him, now Vox does this (which apparently directly received FTX foundation money). It’s absurd as he is essentially a well connected criminal. edit I do want to correct one thing - this is not a puff piece like the NYT one, actually it implicates him.
This and the NYT interview are not puff pieces. They are handing SBF the rope to hang himself with, putting his confession on the record. Not sure what what the people pushing this narrative aren’t understanding. If they wanted to protect him they would refuse to interview him and try to convince him not to speak to anyone but counsel about this.
SBF, his foundation and his family are well connected politically. NYT already did a bizarro puff piece on him, now Vox does this (which apparently directly received FTX foundation money). It’s absurd as he is essentially a well connected criminal. edit I do want to correct one thing - this is not a puff piece like the NYT one, actually it implicates him.
I'm not sure how you'd read this as a puff piece. The reporter described his reaction to the interview as "appalled".
SBF, his foundation and his family are well connected politically. NYT already did a bizarro puff piece on him, now Vox does this (which apparently directly received FTX foundation money). It’s absurd as he is essentially a well connected criminal. edit I do want to correct one thing - this is not a puff piece like the NYT one, actually it implicates him.
This and the NYT interview are not puff pieces. They are handing SBF the rope to hang himself with, putting his confession on the record. Not sure what what the people pushing this narrative aren’t understanding. If they wanted to protect him they would refuse to interview him and try to convince him not to speak to anyone but counsel about this.
> I was trying to make sense of what, behind the PR and the charitable donations and the lobbying, Bankman-Fried actually believes about what’s right and what’s wrong — and especially the ethics of what he did and the industry he worked in. This seems like a weird thing to worry about right now, I imagine my question would be "hey, where'd all the deposits go?" Like, I'm sure it's all interesting in a psychological a…
With such a large sum gone, the tougher question is "where didn't he piss the money away?"
We haven't seen as much commentary from him post-incident to reconcile who he appeared to be before the collapse, with who he apparently is. I think that angle is actually pretty interesting, but ultimately he sounds like just another deranged sociopath. No surprise there. Still interesting.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wonder if it's an attempt to disassociate himself with EA. The general consensus on EA forums is anger and shame at how generally good ideas like treating charitable donations as an investment based on impact have been essentially hijacked and longtermism pushed front and center too.
what is 'EA forums' ?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wonder if it's an attempt to disassociate himself with EA. The general consensus on EA forums is anger and shame at how generally good ideas like treating charitable donations as an investment based on impact have been essentially hijacked and longtermism pushed front and center too.
what is 'EA forums' ?
There’s a few, like less wrong, but this is the main one to many
SBF, his foundation and his family are well connected politically. NYT already did a bizarro puff piece on him, now Vox does this (which apparently directly received FTX foundation money). It’s absurd as he is essentially a well connected criminal. edit I do want to correct one thing - this is not a puff piece like the NYT one, actually it implicates him.
How is this a puff piece? Just posting these chat transcripts is damaging to his reputation and probably his chances in court. He does not come off looking good here.
SBF, his foundation and his family are well connected politically. NYT already did a bizarro puff piece on him, now Vox does this (which apparently directly received FTX foundation money). It’s absurd as he is essentially a well connected criminal. edit I do want to correct one thing - this is not a puff piece like the NYT one, actually it implicates him.
People obviously want to hear what he has to say. Are you saying that an ethical media would refuse to interview him? Why?
> I was trying to make sense of what, behind the PR and the charitable donations and the lobbying, Bankman-Fried actually believes about what’s right and what’s wrong — and especially the ethics of what he did and the industry he worked in. This seems like a weird thing to worry about right now, I imagine my question would be "hey, where'd all the deposits go?" Like, I'm sure it's all interesting in a psychological a…
> I imagine my question would be "hey, where'd all the deposits go?" But we know where they went. To Alameda Research. Then Alameda Research sent them somewhere else. The money isn't coming back, and Alameda Research's collateral of FTT tokens is worthless. So that's that, its done. Its actually quite a simple story here. FTX lent the money to someone else (even if Alameda Research is also owned by SBF), and that oth…
One minor clarification: "lent" should be "stole". If I can't pay my mortgage, I'm not allowed to go break in to my neighbor's house to steal some cash that I'll "borrow" in the hopes of paying back later.
FTX's Ts&Cs we're very clear - customer deposits were not FTX's to lend.
This is a simple, straightforward case of fraud and theft. No additional "crypto-specific regulations" are needed to reach that conclusion.