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

171–180 of 251 posts

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

#171

Post by LarryMullins »

Gareth321 wrote: post #132
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.

Agreed, I think it's institutional. Particularly, the reporters at the big news firms come from privileged backgrounds, are biased towards their own, and use the access that comes with their privilege to further their careers. Those who come from modest backgrounds aspire to join the ranks of the privileged, necessary to further their careers, by sucking up to those above them. "Access journalism" intrinsically favors privileged journalists and incentivizes journalists from less fortunate backgrounds to play along.

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

#172

Post by bioemerl »

_5uxp wrote: post #43
bioemerl wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Furthermore, the current "bad crypto news" is still suppressing the BTC price. What determines the natural price that is being suppressed here?

Price discovery?

What determines the price that the discovery discovers?

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

#173

Post by [deleted] »

thepasswordis wrote: post #57
matwood wrote: post #8

I'll just quote part of what I said a month ago :) > And given what's leaked from their balance sheet, I don't see how people avoid jail time. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33608691 I'll also add that SBF going on tour was the stupidest thing he could have done. Every time he spoke, he was giving the government more evidence. Hubris has often been the downfall of the rich and powerful throughout history. What'…

>like Musk and SBF I‘m sorry, but what ? Just to give some perspective that I don’t think HN really gets: most of my friends have increased their twitter usage. If you aren’t aware, whatever the team did there a few days ago really has appeared to cut bots down to almost 0. SBF is an [alleged] criminal who has [allegedly] defrauded people of billions of dollars, and will likely be spending a substantial amount of tim…

[deleted]

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

#174

Post by greggh »

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.

It is indeed terrifying. I have one, it was not fun.

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

#175

Post by LarryMullins »

kibwen wrote: post #145
cs702 wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> SBF didn’t believe in his effective altruism slogan. That's not what I meant. What I meant is that before FTX's implosion, anything you would read, hear, or see about SBF would make it seem as if he actually believed in it!

Rather than vaguely alluding, it seems simple enough to provide at least a handful of links to sources with references to the passages in question, no? Nothing that I have read seems to be as breathlessly gushing as commenters repeatedly claim them to be.

No post body was provided.

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

#176

Post by zeven7 »

bnralt wrote: post #107
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? I went through a few examples people brought up of journalists supposedly treating Bankman-Fried kindly t…

> Several months ago, I found myself having a few mocktails and splitting vegan snacks with Sam Bankman-Fried at a restaurant near my house. We touched on, among other things, his proposal to create a new publication featuring writers he liked, including me.

> I declined, which obviously in retrospect was the right choice. I told him that I like my Substack just fine and make plenty of money, though he was happy to offer more. But I also told him that given the extent to which we agree on a lot of important issues, I thought it was a lot more valuable to these causes for me to maintain credibility by not accepting any of his money.

Meanwhile the CEO of The Block received a $43M "loan" from SBF[1].

[1] https://www.coindesk.com/podcasts/the-breakdown-with-nlw/sbf...

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

#177

Post by krisoft »

pcl wrote: post #41
pavlov wrote: post #6

It's sort of curious that this SEC action is to protect the venture capital investors like Sequoia who invested in FTX shares directly. If I were a retail investor who lost my savings in FTX, I might be feeling upset that the government is rushing to action in defense of billion-dollar funds whose own due diligence failed massively, while seemingly nothing is being done to help those who invested in crypto based on F…

I would expect that the bankruptcy proceedings and any future civil lawsuits are the main avenues for individuals to seek individual redress. If I were an individual, I wouldn’t really care about how the criminal charges were structured, since it’s not like I would get any individual benefit out of his jail time, one way or the other.

> If I were an individual, I wouldn’t really care about how the criminal charges were structured

Yes. But! As an individual I care if the laws protect me. Have they been clever enough to only scam people like me, would they still go to prison?

As long as the answer to that is yes, I don’t mind if something else they have done is easier to prosecute.

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

#178

Post by sifar »

bnralt wrote: post #107
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? I went through a few examples people brought up of journalists supposedly treating Bankman-Fried kindly t…

>> When I read what journalists were actually saying, they were quite negative about Bankman-Fried

I think the issue was there was no pressing follow up to his evasive replies. e.g Sorkin's interview. He was basically allowed to get away with "I didn't knowingly do it."

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

#179

Post by xxpor »

robocat wrote: post #158
323 wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If I were a retail investor who lost my savings in FTX, I might be feeling upset that the government is rushing to action in defense The customers will be paid before investors with whatever money is there. This is well established by previous case precedents, including in places like unregulated poker betting sites. Anybody can have a claim, including the SEC, but the courts decide allocation order.

> The customers will be paid before investors with whatever money is there. That really depends whether the investment is structured as a secured loan (senior debt) or not. Secured loans get paid out in full, before the unsecured creditors such as customers. > but the courts decide allocation order Mostly that is defined by the laws of the jurisdiction, not the individual court. In the Bahamas, the ranking of credito…

Given FTX is in Chapter 15, would the US order apply?

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

#180

Post by zeven7 »

actualwitch wrote: post #92
thepasswordis wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>like Musk and SBF I‘m sorry, but what ? Just to give some perspective that I don’t think HN really gets: most of my friends have increased their twitter usage. If you aren’t aware, whatever the team did there a few days ago really has appeared to cut bots down to almost 0. SBF is an [alleged] criminal who has [allegedly] defrauded people of billions of dollars, and will likely be spending a substantial amount of tim…

> Just to give some perspective that I don’t think HN really gets: most of my friends have increased their twitter usage. So your friends are using twitter more and you just assume everyone else does too? Have you considered that people who have other opinions exist and theirs is as valid as yours?

> Have you considered that people who have other opinions exist and theirs is as valid as yours?

I think parent is saying the opposite.

"Just to give some perspective that I don’t think HN really gets"

Parent has seen several comments assuming everyone's leaving Twitter and Musk is destroying the platform and himself and will never recover. I, likewise, reading Reddit get the same feeling that some pockets think everybody is leaving Twitter and going to Mastadon or something like this is a big cultural revolution. I think that is true in some pockets, but like parent I don't think anyone except Musk really knows what the actual engagement numbers look like, and even he doesn't know what they'll look like long term. But he is clearly making a bet, and it's silly for a biased hivemind to already assume his downfall when it actually hasn't happened yet. Just like there was a broad assumption that Twitter would have all kinds of technical issues after most of the staff was fired. Maybe that's still to come, but it hasn't really happened yet, and it can't be assumed.

Twitter isn't necessarily going to be an epic failure, and it's strange how some pockets of the internet feel they should make that assertion, whether you agree with Musk's politics or not. And politics is what it really comes down to. Politics is what drives the desire for these communities to see Musk fail, nothing else.

And at any rate it is very strange to compare Musk to SBF in any way.

Post reply on HN