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

Sam Bankman-Fried Convicted

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

511–520 of 1001 posts

Re: Sam Bankman-Fried Convicted

#511

Post by BXlnt2EachOther »

jacquesm wrote: post #147

That happened fast! I expected it to drag on for much longer. Wonder if he'll appeal.

yes, seemed quick for all the reasons sibling posts mention.

appeals aside, it's not over... We've had first trial, yes, but what about second trial?

Four charges had been separated out into a second trial for March 11 of next year. Same judge, different jury? May have been due to logistical reasons or discussions with the Bahamanian government around extradition. It sounds like the government has the option of dropping these over the next months as well.

Sentencing for this one (or both but that seems extremely quick) was just scheduled for March 28 2024.

Re: Sam Bankman-Fried Convicted

#512

Post by StressedDev »

infogulch wrote: post #431
1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote: post #400

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."

Unfortunately the real beneficiaries of these crimes will be overlooked now that their fall guy has taken the hit. https://www.wsj.com/articles/sam-bankman-frieds-dirty-politi...

I doubt the politicians and political action committees would have taken the money if they had known it was stolen.

In a lot of ways, they are also victims because they now have to do extra work to either defend themselves, or payback the "donation". In the case of the PACs, I bet many of them already spent the money and can't pay it back.

Re: Sam Bankman-Fried Convicted

#513

Post by quickthrower2 »

gamblor956 wrote: post #198
wmf wrote: post #128

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.

Maybe. It is not liquid like stocks though. They'll probably try to auction it off?

Re: Sam Bankman-Fried Convicted

#514

Post by nradov »

Gustomaximus wrote: post #389

I'm curious how the sentencing goes, not only for SBF but those around him that took deals. In my limited view of US cases, it often seems prosecutors let off lightly anyone that will testify in return for their whale. Sometimes feels it's more symbolic justice that way than real.

Some of this is also "Prisoner's Dilemma" type game theory with prosecutors playing a long game to improve their odds of winning not just the current case but future cases as well. When there are several co-defendants the prosecutors will give the best deal to whoever cracks first and agrees to testify against the others. Future co-defendants in other cases (and their attorneys) see that pattern and then race each other to get the first, best deal.

Re: Sam Bankman-Fried Convicted

#515

Post by Terr_ »

akira2501 wrote: post #377
hintymad wrote: post #243

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…

> The evidences were air-tight SBF is a dumb criminal, who then screwed over everyone he abused into creating this theft. I honestly can't imagine many easier setups, less sympathetic defendants, or parades of pissed off co-workers willing to put the knife in him before he got it in them. > SBF did not have any intention of committing a crime. His fraud started early on, and he used the same tactic over and over agai…

"Your honor, I never intended to commit a crime, I simply intended to start with mere childish mistakes and then exponentially escalate their damage and viciousness throughout my entire life without any repercussions. Is that so wrong?"

Re: Sam Bankman-Fried Convicted

#516

Post by dragonwriter »

az226 wrote: post #323
randycupertino wrote: post #320

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 guess he didn't have the money to pay for a good defense team, or didn't listen. Pretty amateur hour what he did. Made it very easy and quick for the jurors.

> I guess he didn't have the money to pay for a good defense team, or didn't listen.

He had good lawyers around and immediately after the FTX collapse; he very publicly fired them because they wanted him to stop tweeting extensive descriptions of his crimes as a coping mechanism.

Which was going to be a problem for him no matter how good of lawyers he got later.

Re: Sam Bankman-Fried Convicted

#517

Post by FFP999 »

manonthewall wrote: post #499
FFP999 wrote: post #393

> You’d think this MIT graduate would wise up, but he never did. The MIT campus has a major public road running through the middle of it, one of the busiest surface streets in the area. You don't have to stand there very long to see a crowd of students almost get hit by a car because they didn't look before they crossed the street. Point is, the old cliche is true, there really is such a thing as a person with a lot…

the whole "book learning nerd not living in the real world" is quite cliche these days, there are much better descriptors such as emotional, literary, mathematical, etc intelligences. Someone may be high in all of them or in just one or none.

I mean, I explicitly _said_ it was a cliche. But I'd argue that it's not wrong. I guess if I had to describe the kind of person I'm thinking of in a more nuanced way, I'd say they're educated and very good, often brilliant, in their chosen work, but both have low emotional intelligence and are lacking a sort of...I don't know how to put it exactly...basic ability to take care of themselves.

There are also plenty of booksmart nerds with high emotional and practical intelligence. (I like to think I'm one, sure didn't used to be.) On the whole they are fun people to be around.

Re: Sam Bankman-Fried Convicted

#518

Post by Geee »

SkyMarshal wrote: post #507
FFP999 wrote: post #393

> You’d think this MIT graduate would wise up, but he never did. The MIT campus has a major public road running through the middle of it, one of the busiest surface streets in the area. You don't have to stand there very long to see a crowd of students almost get hit by a car because they didn't look before they crossed the street. Point is, the old cliche is true, there really is such a thing as a person with a lot…

That's been my impression of SBF since FTX collapsed. Quite book smart, but zero experience in building a major service that custodies billions in other peoples' money. Raw intelligence is not enough in that context. Ideally you want to have apprenticed for at least a few years at a real exchange or custodial service. Somewhere you learn all the engineering details about how to architect it with proper financial cont…

It had nothing to do with engineering issues / risk. He was a scammer.

Re: Sam Bankman-Fried Convicted

#519

Post by ohhnoodont »

StressedDev wrote: post #462
tptacek wrote: post #362

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The opposite thing is going to happen in this case, and I'm sure you'll hear Ken on Serious Trouble saying the same thing next week (you can get Andrew McCarthy, another former AUSA, saying the same thing in the National Review today if you want that with a dash of anti-woke conservative racial politics). In basic economic crimes, sentences scale primarily with dollar losses, and FTX lost billions. He's going to do s…

Elizabth Holmes committed fraud, endangered lives, and harassed whistle blowers (one spent over $400,000 in legal fees fighting with Theranos). She only got 11 years and 3 months. I would not be surprised if Sam Bankman-Fried also got a fairly short sentence.

> She only got 11 years and 3 months.

Her sentence has already been reduced to 9.5 years.

Re: Sam Bankman-Fried Convicted

#520

Post by ants_everywhere »

SkyMarshal wrote: post #507
FFP999 wrote: post #393

> You’d think this MIT graduate would wise up, but he never did. The MIT campus has a major public road running through the middle of it, one of the busiest surface streets in the area. You don't have to stand there very long to see a crowd of students almost get hit by a car because they didn't look before they crossed the street. Point is, the old cliche is true, there really is such a thing as a person with a lot…

That's been my impression of SBF since FTX collapsed. Quite book smart, but zero experience in building a major service that custodies billions in other peoples' money. Raw intelligence is not enough in that context. Ideally you want to have apprenticed for at least a few years at a real exchange or custodial service. Somewhere you learn all the engineering details about how to architect it with proper financial cont…

> He probably got caught up in the moment, implicitly assumed he was smart enough to compensate and not need it

The pop psychology term for this is the Dunning-Kruger effect.

Post reply on HN