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

Sam Bankman-Fried doesn't recall

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 123 posts

Re: Sam Bankman-Fried doesn't recall

#101

Post by Clubber »

steveBK123 wrote: post #54
Clubber wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I don't get taking the stand voluntarily to just say "I don't recall" endlessly? He's taking the stand (which is a risk) because his lawyer asks him questions that are favorable to him. The risk comes in because the prosecutor gets to cross examine the witness, which is where all this recall stuff came from.

But isn't it "too smart by half" kind of move? Clearly the prosecution is quite good, and clearly SBF is quite guilty. He is going to get dragged through the mud having to respond "I dont recall" to a litany of embarrassing questions.. both because the lawyer is good and because he did lots of embarrassing things, openly..

I haven't been following this specific case, so take that for what it's worth.

>He is going to get dragged through the mud having to respond "I dont recall" to a litany of embarrassing questions..

Yes, but he isn't admitting to anything, confirming anything for the prosecution, or saying anything incriminating either and that's the trap of the cross examination when taking the stand.

Re: Sam Bankman-Fried doesn't recall

#102

Post by HDThoreaun »

omarfarooq wrote: post #46
mvdtnz wrote: post #33

This article has some really great stuff in it but I wish the author would cut the flowery bullshit and most importantly stop trying to make the piece about themselves. I do not care about how much YOU cringed, about the "holy fucking shit" you wrote on YOUR notes, etc. So many journalists nowadays think THEY are the story. Stick to the real story, keep yourself out of it.

Don't see an issue with that here, she was present in the courtroom so the personal narrative is warranted, and I don't see that got in the way at all. Adds a human element. With that being said, you can copy and paste the article in ChatGPT and have it render the way you want. What a time to be alive!

The author clearly hates SBF, which is fair, but got in the way of the facts. I don't care that they personally dislike him and it takes away from the story but more importantly makes the piece much less trustworthy.

Re: Sam Bankman-Fried doesn't recall

#103

Post by HDThoreaun »

mvdtnz wrote: post #43
sieste wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really don't understand what the big deal is with "Do you remember saying 'these precise words'?" - "No, but it sounds like something I could have said." Given how human memory works, that should be the honest answer for everything anyone ever said more than 5 minutes ago. Why does the article turn this into a major gotcha?

You don't recall anything you said more than 5 minutes ago? Even from prepared statements in court, or in rehearsed public speaking situations, or in one-off conversations with celebrity podcast hosts? I would suggest you see a doctor because that's not normal at all.

SBF did hundreds of celebrity podcast interviews. It is in no way surprising to not remember quotes from them. That doesn't mean it's true, but it easily could be.

Re: Sam Bankman-Fried doesn't recall

#105

Post by fshbbdssbbgdd »

mpalmer wrote: post #39
mvdtnz wrote: post #33

This article has some really great stuff in it but I wish the author would cut the flowery bullshit and most importantly stop trying to make the piece about themselves. I do not care about how much YOU cringed, about the "holy fucking shit" you wrote on YOUR notes, etc. So many journalists nowadays think THEY are the story. Stick to the real story, keep yourself out of it.

It'd be one thing if the flowery writing were actually good, but the images don't even make sense. as prosecutor Danielle Sassoon went through a brutal line of questioning like a hot buzzsaw through a butter cow Shouldn't the brutal line of questioning be the buzzsaw, and SBF the butter?

Surely there’s a lot of competition and rush to publish news on this trial. Changing around the metaphors might not be the highest priority of any editors.

Re: Sam Bankman-Fried doesn't recall

#106

Post by harambae »

bagels wrote: post #71
mpalmer wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It'd be one thing if the flowery writing were actually good, but the images don't even make sense. as prosecutor Danielle Sassoon went through a brutal line of questioning like a hot buzzsaw through a butter cow Shouldn't the brutal line of questioning be the buzzsaw, and SBF the butter?

Typically bandsaws are used to process cows anyways, so it makes even less sense.

I think it's this type of butter cow being referenced

https://www.iowastatefair.org/about/butter-cow

Re: Sam Bankman-Fried doesn't recall

#107

Post by SilasX »

steveBK123 wrote: post #7
fasthands9 wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Definitely - but it's still notable that he's doing this after voluntarily taking the stand.

Yes, not a lawyer so maybe theres some nuance here but.. I don't get taking the stand voluntarily to just say "I don't recall" endlessly? At some point does the judge tell you to GTFO and strike all your testimony? Can they instruct the jury in some manner harmful to you as a result of your obvious malign intent? Etc..

I remember an answer from Quora about how lawyers handle such a witness on cross-examination: They say, “well, we have this evidence from the time saying you did/said XYZ. So you’re saying you can’t think of anything that would contradict that account?”

Re: Sam Bankman-Fried doesn't recall

#108

Post by jowea »

medler wrote: post #25

“I found myself reflecting on how smart the average person is. Maybe they don’t know calculus. Maybe they’ll never read Ulysses. Maybe they can’t code. But they definitely know how to identify bullshit when they see it.” How could anyone believe this? “Average” people fall for bullshit all the time.

To give one potential similar example, it seems Elizabeth Holmes' charisma made an effect on at least some of the jurors.

Re: Sam Bankman-Fried doesn't recall

#109

Post by jowea »

otabdeveloper4 wrote: post #50
H8crilA wrote: post #20

What is amazing is that nobody infiltrated their structure and ran off with the money. There are sophisticated criminal organisations out there that go to much, much more effort to obtain funding. Just to take Hezbollah since it's all over the news recently: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Funding_of_Hezbollah#Latin_Ame...

Pretty sure FTX was a sophisticated criminal organisation themselves. Probably didn't want a turf war.

I've only followed the situation casually but I really didn't get this impression. Enormous mess of corporate structure and accounting and no exit plan?

Re: Sam Bankman-Fried doesn't recall

#110

Post by jowea »

H8crilA wrote: post #20

What is amazing is that nobody infiltrated their structure and ran off with the money. There are sophisticated criminal organisations out there that go to much, much more effort to obtain funding. Just to take Hezbollah since it's all over the news recently: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Funding_of_Hezbollah#Latin_Ame...

Wasn't there a still unexplained last-day hack of a fortune there?
Post reply on HN