The United States of America vs. Samuel Bankman-Fried Indictment [pdf] • Hacker News Board

Re: The United States of America vs. Samuel Bankman-Fried Indictment [pdf]

#181

Post by jasonwatkinspdx » Tue, Dec 13, 2022, 5:49 PM UTC

axus wrote: post #149

Was listening to C-SPAN, they said his written statement for the record of the hearing was very offensive. "I would like to state, under oath," and then two words they wouldn't repeat. Doing a Google search of "SBF Fuck You" shows he's already told regulators and his lawyers to go F themselves, I'm guessing he said the same to the US Congress.

Forbes published it: https://www.forbes.com/sites/stevenehrlich/2022/12/13/exclus...

He said "I fucked up" which would get C-SPAN in trouble with the FCC.

It is a very defiant and entitled sounding statement though.

Re: The United States of America vs. Samuel Bankman-Fried Indictment [pdf]

#182

Post by boeingUH60 » Tue, Dec 13, 2022, 5:50 PM UTC

noelsusman wrote: post #148

comte7092 wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Seeing how thoroughly he convinced people that he had political influence We’ve gotten tot he point where we’ve gone way too far off the deep end when it comes to this narrative around political influence. the collective imagination seems to have risen to comic book level proportions. All people saw was SBF gave a bunch of money and thought, “he must have a ton of influence”. Meanwhile, in my state, he gave $11 mill…

His donations to Democrats accounted for 0.025% of all the money Democrats spent on the midterm election last month. Anyone who genuinely believed that can buy you a get out of jail free card for billions of dollars in fraud should seriously re-evaluate how they think the world works.

I almost called BS on your statistic, but a simple Google search shows that this year's midterm elections saw spending of up to $16.7 billion [1], so it appears to be true. As a non-US citizen, the amount of money in US politics shreds my mind...what are they even spending it on? Ads? Campaign outreaches? How much do these things cost?

If it's how it is in my weird African country (Nigeria), I'll wager that most of the money is spent on advertisements and clueless campaign managers and staff enjoying the grift. But then, I understand; the U.S. is a really rich country with a high percentage of politically-active citizens, so they put their money where their mouth is.

1- https://www.cnbc.com/2022/11/03/2022-midterm-election-spendi...

Re: The United States of America vs. Samuel Bankman-Fried Indictment [pdf]

#183

Post by salawat » Tue, Dec 13, 2022, 5:50 PM UTC

jpmattia wrote: post #27

outside1234 wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's considered "a wire" by the law now :)

Curses! Foiled again! Does it help that I've now removed the fiber?

Odds are the legal system will converge on a non-technical, highly abstract meaning of "wire" to the effect of "any medium for conveyance of a signal over long distances (where long distances can reasonably be concluded to encompass multiple jurisdictions).

This is why Legalese and English are truly seperate beasts linguistically.

Re: The United States of America vs. Samuel Bankman-Fried Indictment [pdf]

#184

Post by freejazz » Tue, Dec 13, 2022, 5:50 PM UTC

andrewmutz wrote: post #39

Xeoncross wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't pity SBF, but this advice is important for innocent citizens. It's unfortunate that anything you say to law enforcement can be used against you - but none of it can be used for you. A police officer can testify against you, but if they try to support you it will be dismissed as "hearsay".

If an officer testified in support of you about what he witnessed, why would that be hearsay?

It's hearsay 101 - an out of court statement by someone who didn't say it, being offered for the truth of the statement. it's not hearsay when you say it to the officer because that is a party admission.

Re: The United States of America vs. Samuel Bankman-Fried Indictment [pdf]

#185

Post by NaturalPhallacy » Tue, Dec 13, 2022, 5:50 PM UTC

bredren wrote: post #135

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How anyone could look at this man's behavior over the last few weeks and not think he was on a fast track to a federal penitentiary is beyond me Seeing how thoroughly he convinced people that he had political influence, and given his general lack of awareness, I’m willing to give merit to his believing he was immune. Similar to how people outside securities think insider trading is more rampant than it is, insider…

Do we have some examples of people who have amassed great real or perceived fortunes (and power) that have not become drunk on it? Musk on stage with Chapelle last night, Elizabeth Holmes, or SBF’s whole schtick, who are the ones who have kept their feet on the ground? What are the attributes of these others who don’t lose themselves in fawning attention and (sometimes short-lived) mountains of capital?

Yes, you've likely never heard of them: https://www.forbes.com/real-time-billionaires/

I have no clue who these people are:

Hank & Doug Meijer

Tom & Judy Love

Stewart & Lynda Resnick

Andrew & Peggy Cherng

In fact the list of ones I recognize is tiny compared to the whole list.

Some of them don't even have pictures, but they're all billionaires. And yes, I consider even a single billion to be a great, real fortune. Most people will never crack a million.

Re: The United States of America vs. Samuel Bankman-Fried Indictment [pdf]

#186

Post by lisper » Tue, Dec 13, 2022, 5:51 PM UTC

noelsusman wrote: post #148

comte7092 wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Seeing how thoroughly he convinced people that he had political influence We’ve gotten tot he point where we’ve gone way too far off the deep end when it comes to this narrative around political influence. the collective imagination seems to have risen to comic book level proportions. All people saw was SBF gave a bunch of money and thought, “he must have a ton of influence”. Meanwhile, in my state, he gave $11 mill…

His donations to Democrats accounted for 0.025% of all the money Democrats spent on the midterm election last month. Anyone who genuinely believed that can buy you a get out of jail free card for billions of dollars in fraud should seriously re-evaluate how they think the world works.

You're not wrong, but on the other hand... the limit on direct contributions to federal campaigns is $5800. I can tell you from personal experience that this is enough to get a meeting with any senator or congressman except the most senior leadership (their price is about 10x more). So for about $3-4M/yr you can have every incumbent senator and representative on speed dial. They won't necessarily do your bidding, but they will return your calls.

Re: The United States of America vs. Samuel Bankman-Fried Indictment [pdf]

#187

Post by comte7092 » Tue, Dec 13, 2022, 5:54 PM UTC

boeingUH60 wrote: post #182

noelsusman wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

His donations to Democrats accounted for 0.025% of all the money Democrats spent on the midterm election last month. Anyone who genuinely believed that can buy you a get out of jail free card for billions of dollars in fraud should seriously re-evaluate how they think the world works.

I almost called BS on your statistic, but a simple Google search shows that this year's midterm elections saw spending of up to $16.7 billion [1], so it appears to be true. As a non-US citizen, the amount of money in US politics shreds my mind...what are they even spending it on? Ads? Campaign outreaches? How much do these things cost? If it's how it is in my weird African country (Nigeria), I'll wager that most of t…

It’s important to keep in mind how much more expensive it is to buy ads in major US media markets. It’s not difficult to spend tens of millions of dollars just buying television ads for a few weeks during campaign season.

Re: The United States of America vs. Samuel Bankman-Fried Indictment [pdf]

#188

Post by potatototoo99 » Tue, Dec 13, 2022, 5:55 PM UTC

noelsusman wrote: post #148

comte7092 wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Seeing how thoroughly he convinced people that he had political influence We’ve gotten tot he point where we’ve gone way too far off the deep end when it comes to this narrative around political influence. the collective imagination seems to have risen to comic book level proportions. All people saw was SBF gave a bunch of money and thought, “he must have a ton of influence”. Meanwhile, in my state, he gave $11 mill…

His donations to Democrats accounted for 0.025% of all the money Democrats spent on the midterm election last month. Anyone who genuinely believed that can buy you a get out of jail free card for billions of dollars in fraud should seriously re-evaluate how they think the world works.

He donated almost 1bn - that is known of. The Democrats spent about 5bn in the whole election. Do you have a source for your numbers?

Re: The United States of America vs. Samuel Bankman-Fried Indictment [pdf]

#189

Post by jiscariot » Tue, Dec 13, 2022, 5:56 PM UTC

comte7092 wrote: post #100

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How anyone could look at this man's behavior over the last few weeks and not think he was on a fast track to a federal penitentiary is beyond me Seeing how thoroughly he convinced people that he had political influence, and given his general lack of awareness, I’m willing to give merit to his believing he was immune. Similar to how people outside securities think insider trading is more rampant than it is, insider…

>Seeing how thoroughly he convinced people that he had political influence We’ve gotten tot he point where we’ve gone way too far off the deep end when it comes to this narrative around political influence. the collective imagination seems to have risen to comic book level proportions. All people saw was SBF gave a bunch of money and thought, “he must have a ton of influence”. Meanwhile, in my state, he gave $11 mill…

He was the #2 donor behind Soros to Democratic candidates. It's not every day that the number two gets indicted for a multi-billion dollar fraud. It is good to see questions around influence arise.

Re: The United States of America vs. Samuel Bankman-Fried Indictment [pdf]

#190

Post by leprechaun1066 » Tue, Dec 13, 2022, 5:57 PM UTC

pseingatl wrote: post #127

Can we discus recovery? The Madoff trustee was able to recover something like 90% of the Madoff Ponzi. Alameda and FTX's real estate purchases have value, as do their VC investments, purchases of bank stock, etc. In other words, it's not all gone. My understanding is that even some of the political contributions can be clawed back. FTX's purchases of IOU's (i.e., crypto) that declined in value are not likely to be re…

The guy in charge of this for FTX is the same guy in charge of handling getting money back from the Enron collapse. He's currently testifying to congress about the state of things. It doesn't look good.