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

SEC Charges Samuel Bankman-Fried with Defrauding Investors in FTX [pdf]

sec.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 251 posts

Re: SEC Charges Samuel Bankman-Fried with Defrauding Investors in FTX [pdf]

#131

Post by stevespang »

JeremyNT wrote: post #121
cs702 wrote: post #82

The most interest aspect in the FTX saga, for me, is that SBF was treated very gently by major news outlets (and maybe by government regulators too)... until regular individuals in social media started asking: Why is SBF being treated so kindly? Why would journalists (and regulators) assume that SBF meant well? A possible answer that no one ever mentions is that SBF possesses many qualities that are valued and admire…

> The most interest aspect in the FTX saga, for me, is that SBF was treated very gently by major news outlets (and maybe by government regulators too)... until regular individuals in social media started asking: Why is SBF being treated so kindly? Why would journalists (and regulators) assume that SBF meant well? This wasn't universally true. See the VICE coverage for example. The "old" media bought into SBF in exact…

No post body was provided.

Re: SEC Charges Samuel Bankman-Fried with Defrauding Investors in FTX [pdf]

#132

Post by Gareth321 »

cs702 wrote: post #82

The most interest aspect in the FTX saga, for me, is that SBF was treated very gently by major news outlets (and maybe by government regulators too)... until regular individuals in social media started asking: Why is SBF being treated so kindly? Why would journalists (and regulators) assume that SBF meant well? A possible answer that no one ever mentions is that SBF possesses many qualities that are valued and admire…

To me this is just one more nail in the coffin of institutional media. There is clearly bias baked into reporting at the institutional level now, and no desire to uproot it. This is what makes independent media so important today.

Re: SEC Charges Samuel Bankman-Fried with Defrauding Investors in FTX [pdf]

#133

Post by heurisko »

c0m wrote: post #23

The SEC's complaint. It's a brutal read if you're Sam: https://www.sec.gov/litigation/complaints/2022/comp-pr2022-2...

Just a few days ago, he was hoping to "make people's money back". [1]

It's a bit sad, as he appears delusional. A less forgiving viewpoint would be that his background cultivated his sense of being untouchable; that it was just a case of having another go.

But not as sad as the people who lost money they couldn't afford to lose.

[1] https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-63911363

Re: SEC Charges Samuel Bankman-Fried with Defrauding Investors in FTX [pdf]

#134

Post by yonaguska »

cs702 wrote: post #82

The most interest aspect in the FTX saga, for me, is that SBF was treated very gently by major news outlets (and maybe by government regulators too)... until regular individuals in social media started asking: Why is SBF being treated so kindly? Why would journalists (and regulators) assume that SBF meant well? A possible answer that no one ever mentions is that SBF possesses many qualities that are valued and admire…

You keep using the phrase "valued in elite circles". I honestly don't think many of these traits are actually valued in elite circles. The perception of these traits is valuable. The values...I'm not so sure. Quite a bit of energy in elite circles is spent on curating an image, rather than actually being decent. You have a whole set of social rules that you follow to distinguish you from the lesser people, and it's all about following the rules, not actually being genuine. Actually being genuine- well, you're kind of a naïve sucker, and even worse- you're unpredictable. Honesty is only valued so far as you follow the rules, and are honest about your own rational self interest when doing business. Hard work and high intelligence are definitely valued, but even more valuable is the person that is intelligent enough to not work hard.

In my armhchair opinion, the Illusion of these values is simply a descendant of the feudal concept of Chivalry- it's important to have rules and social norms to establish an in-group of trust, and just as important for the non-elite to know that the elites have their best interest in mind, via "effective altruism"- because the elites are also honest, hard-working people, that got there through their honest hard work. And hey, maybe you can join that club if you invest in the right trustworthy person.

Re: SEC Charges Samuel Bankman-Fried with Defrauding Investors in FTX [pdf]

#135

Post by waylandsmithers »

cs702 wrote: post #82

The most interest aspect in the FTX saga, for me, is that SBF was treated very gently by major news outlets (and maybe by government regulators too)... until regular individuals in social media started asking: Why is SBF being treated so kindly? Why would journalists (and regulators) assume that SBF meant well? A possible answer that no one ever mentions is that SBF possesses many qualities that are valued and admire…

I would guess some number of people in these newsrooms either:

1) Don't understand anything about bitcoin 2) Own bitcoin and don't want to do something that would push the price lower

Re: SEC Charges Samuel Bankman-Fried with Defrauding Investors in FTX [pdf]

#136

Post by Finbarr »

arcticbull wrote: post #117
perihelions wrote: post #19

Note that the SEC's is merely a civil action. The federal criminal indictment hasn't been unsealed yet (but should be soon, today [0]). [0] https://apnews.com/article/technology-business-bahamas-unite... ( "We expect to move to unseal the indictment in the morning and will have more to say at that time" )

I believe the federal criminal indictment is public now. [1] - First count: Conspiracy to commit wire fraud to defraud customers. - Second count: Wire fraud on customers. - Third count: Conspiracy to commit wire fraud on lenders. - Fourth count: Wire fraud on lenders. (again, specifically lenders to Alameda) - Fifth count: Conspiracy to commit commodities fraud. - Sixth count: Conspiracy to commit securities fraud. I…

Imagine reading a document like this with "United States of America v Your Name" at the top. It would be terrifying. These charges are serious and SBF is going to go down for a long time if convicted.

There's also a forfeiture section in the federal indictment that demands forfeiture of all any and all property that is traceable to the commission of the offences.

Re: SEC Charges Samuel Bankman-Fried with Defrauding Investors in FTX [pdf]

#137

Post by jcranmer »

misiti3780 wrote: post #87
rhaway84773 wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

SBF didn’t believe in his effective altruism slogan. He basically admitted in the texts to the reporter he thought would be private that the EA stuff was BS. Also, I’m not sure what you mean by “treated kindly”. If you’re talking about why he wasn’t arrested yet, it’s obvious because the SEC was building its case, and more so because he was voluntarily going on public forums and publicly admitting increasing levels o…

they are referring to this: https://www.coindesk.com/layer2/2022/11/15/lets-talk-about-t...

I sat down and read the NYT article. It's not that glamorous for SBF--at best, it paints him as someone in way over his head, but I'm not sure that's a fair characterization. It's somewhat humanizing, but largely in a "what is the CEO thinking as their business falls to ash around them?"--it intersperses the interview with notes about how the company was probably lying at times, and the most contentious questions are summarized as "interviewee doesn't want to talk about them." I wouldn't characterize it as a puff piece, but I think the complaints are largely that people wanted it to be a thorough evisceration of Crypto Enemy Number One.

Re: SEC Charges Samuel Bankman-Fried with Defrauding Investors in FTX [pdf]

#138

Post by lovehashbrowns »

blitzar wrote: post #106
c0m wrote: post #23

The SEC's complaint. It's a brutal read if you're Sam: https://www.sec.gov/litigation/complaints/2022/comp-pr2022-2...

> 31. From the inception of FTX, Bankman-Fried diverted FTX customer funds to Alameda, and he continued to do so until FTX’s collapse in November 2022 I assume they have the evidence, and while what SBF was saying (we never touched customer funds etc.) was never particularly credible - it blows up the narative that he has maintained to date. Indeed much of the case is built on his public statements (and testimony) be…

They have SBF’s own idiot mouth as evidence when he claimed, multiple times, that Alameda was created first, got its bank account, and FTX used that Alameda bank account when FTX was created.

He alludes to it here: https://youtu.be/4o_jPzBZSIo at 11:58 or so, where he mentions “before FTX had its own bank account.”

I know there’s a longer explanation, but that’s the best citation I can come up with off the top of my head. In the longer explanation, he specifically says that creating a bank account for a new company can be difficult, so they used Alameda’s bank account as they waited for a bank account specifically for FTX.

This goes specifically with point 31 in the document. Of course, they’ll have better evidence once they go through discovery, but this moron has been on a self-incrimination tour. I’d call it a wild success!

Re: SEC Charges Samuel Bankman-Fried with Defrauding Investors in FTX [pdf]

#139

Post by coolspot »

Finbarr wrote: post #136
arcticbull wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe the federal criminal indictment is public now. [1] - First count: Conspiracy to commit wire fraud to defraud customers. - Second count: Wire fraud on customers. - Third count: Conspiracy to commit wire fraud on lenders. - Fourth count: Wire fraud on lenders. (again, specifically lenders to Alameda) - Fifth count: Conspiracy to commit commodities fraud. - Sixth count: Conspiracy to commit securities fraud. I…

Imagine reading a document like this with "United States of America v Your Name" at the top. It would be terrifying. These charges are serious and SBF is going to go down for a long time if convicted. There's also a forfeiture section in the federal indictment that demands forfeiture of all any and all property that is traceable to the commission of the offences.

> Imagine reading a document like this with "United States of America v Your Name" at the top.

I once contested a traffic violation and the court paperwork stated “People of California vs ”. People of California have lost.

Re: SEC Charges Samuel Bankman-Fried with Defrauding Investors in FTX [pdf]

#140

Post by grappler »

cs702 wrote: post #82

The most interest aspect in the FTX saga, for me, is that SBF was treated very gently by major news outlets (and maybe by government regulators too)... until regular individuals in social media started asking: Why is SBF being treated so kindly? Why would journalists (and regulators) assume that SBF meant well? A possible answer that no one ever mentions is that SBF possesses many qualities that are valued and admire…

I think it just took some parts of the media a few days to sort through the noise and pick up what the most important developments actually were, and perhaps get the necessary confirmations on the meaningful developments (and lack of confirmation on the wrong ones).

It takes any profession time to correct mistakes and get the story right, but the media have the unenviable task of trying to do that very very quickly.

Post reply on HN