431–440 of 1001 posts
https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/pr/statement-us-attorney-d... "This case is also a warning to every fraudster who thinks they're untouchable, that their crimes are too complex for us to catch, that they are too powerful to prosecute, or that they are clever enough to talk their way out of it if caught."
https://www.wsj.com/articles/sam-bankman-frieds-dirty-politi...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's being debated in the bankruptcy court. Some creditors want to sell it off and others want to let it ride. Because this is crypto, some people want to issue a crypto token that represents claims on the estate.
Spoiler alert: it will be sold off to satisfy the debts of the bankrupt corporation. That's SOP for bankruptcy court, and it would take an extremely persuasive case to convince the court to do otherwise.
It's one thing for Google etc to invest billions in cash and cloud services[1] into Anthropic with the understanding that money will be used for engineering and growth.
It's quite different for any buyer to come in and spend $4B on the secondary market for nothing but shares, with none of that money going to Anthropic.
There is a large appetite for exposure to the big AI companies, so maybe the demand is there. But it's not as simple as selling a large stock holding on the public market.
[1] https://www.axios.com/2023/10/30/google-invests-2-billion-an...
I was reading the trial report by Inner City Press. The AUSAs were incredibly thorough and strategic. The evidences were air-tight, the cross-examination was masterfully controlled with precision and incisiveness, and of course the closing argument was forceful. It was a great joy to read the report, as if I was watching an extended episode of The Good Fight. On the other hand, the defense was really weak, quite hand…
At the end of the day, the defense had an unwinnable case. Their defendent is an idiot, and all of his co-conspirators plead guilty to all charges.
https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/pr/statement-us-attorney-d... "This case is also a warning to every fraudster who thinks they're untouchable, that their crimes are too complex for us to catch, that they are too powerful to prosecute, or that they are clever enough to talk their way out of it if caught."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The 5 hours doesn’t surprise me. I was on the jury of a federal fraud trial with 2 defendants with 15 charges, ~30 million in losses. We were thorough and went through each count separately, including reviewing some of the evidence, and were done in maybe 8 hours spread across 2 days. We ended up with a mixed verdict: one count not guilty for both, another not guilty for one. I fully believe they were aware and commi…
> to explain that “the internet uses wires” I wonder if they did that to avoid having to explain to the jury that wire fraud does not actually require the use of wires...
And are modern fiber optic cables wires in any sense of the word? Does the relevant statute in USC18 actually define "wire" for the purpose of the crime?
Part of me thinks that wireless communications must be included, but one might make the case that even then, information/communication is transmitted over wire at some point.
I recall his interviews and annoyed tone at uncomfortable questions - made me laugh, just like people on speed.
And absolutely avoid selegiline for "productivity", especially with amphetamines, this will turn anyone into a pathological compulsive person (e.g. a gambler).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's being debated in the bankruptcy court. Some creditors want to sell it off and others want to let it ride. Because this is crypto, some people want to issue a crypto token that represents claims on the estate.
i dont get why the shares in the investment isn't just divvied up to each individual investor, and let them make a choice to sell or not. And if there's transaction costs involved in selling small amounts, it could be aggregated before divving up, and those who wants to sell can collectively sell and save on costs.
That happened fast! I expected it to drag on for much longer. Wonder if he'll appeal.
They always appeal.. "Dad, why is the American government the best government? "Because of our endless appeals system" Thank You for Smoking
One aspect of SBF's downfall that is not discussed enough, IMO: amphetamines (even taken for medical reasons/ADHD) release a ton of dopamine, seek more release, and make you do some weird stuff and seek risky behaviors (and reinforce them through reward system). I recall his interviews and annoyed tone at uncomfortable questions - made me laugh, just like people on speed. And absolutely avoid selegiline for "producti…
I liked the article detailing how poorly he did on the stand: https://www.thefp.com/p/humiliating-cross-examination-sam-ba... “Did you say in private, ‘Fuck regulators?’ ” “Did you call some customers ‘dumb motherfuckers?’ ” “Did you fly to the Super Bowl in a private plane?” “Most FTX customers did not have a line of credit, correct?” “Do you deny that Alameda had a $65 billion line of credit?” And on, and on, and o…
I'm no lawyer, but I think that the defense has to be presented with all the evidence that will be used in the prosecution's case, before the trial starts. In that case, it's even funnier because the defense knew the prosecution had all of those things before he was even asked those questions.
But my understanding is, they’re not obligated to turn over evidence that is not part of their case and is only used to rebut a witness’s testimony. Which would cover the stuff they used to contradict SBF’s statements on the stand.
Can someone clarify? (Sorry, “add color”.)