111–120 of 226 posts
My question is why the NY times is still running a summit where SBF is currently still scheduled to speak.
I obviously can’t speak for everyone, but personally, I am much more interested in what he has to say now than I was pre-collapse.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's plenty of journalistic value in interviewing him and the audience will be very interested in hearing it. I'm not sure what being outraged over his interview is going to achieve Signalling you disagree with what he did? To protect people from his hearing his dangerous words? To punish him? IMO hearing his rationale, seeing how he convinced people, the lies he tells himself, etc should all be analyzed and publi…
Forget about the journalists, other speakers and interviewees are attending...why would THEY want to be associated with this?
They aren't suddenly friends with the guy because he gave a virtual interview over Zoom at the same event as them.
You don't need to be constantly publicly showing your outrage to make it clear "x person bad". We get it. We know he's bad. Even without such brave moral heroics.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/sam-bankman-fried-ftx-team-amon... FTX and it's executives donated $70 million to politicians as well (in the last 18 months). SBF donated $40MM to Democrats, and a different executive donated $23MM to Republicans. They were trying to buy all kinds of influence.
Not discounting any of the stuff that FTX has done or will come to light, but this practice of supporting “both sides” is a very common, by-the-book strategy for any special interest group or organization looking to buy influence and is flushed with money.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
While I have little confidence in the average NYT reader I think people need to be able to make up their own minds, and Sam has an important and relevant perspective which we should be able to take into account, even if he might frame it in a way that makes him look good
Can you point to any one thing he said which no one else has said before? Maybe an insightful comment to help understand his "relevant perspective"? He got a degree from MIT, did a year at Jane Street, but is unable to keep basic financial records??? This doesn't make sense to me, and seems like obvious fraud.
From the article: “The chairman of FBH is Jean Chalopin, who, along with being a co-creator of cartoon cop Inspector Gadget in the 1980s, is the chairman of Deltec Bank, which, like FTX, is based in the Bahamas. Deltec’s best-known client is Tether, a crypto company with $65 billion in assets offering a stablecoin that is pegged to the dollar.” That tells you everything you need to know.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not discounting any of the stuff that FTX has done or will come to light, but this practice of supporting “both sides” is a very common, by-the-book strategy for any special interest group or organization looking to buy influence and is flushed with money.
I’m still baffled that this kind of corruption isn’t frowned upon more. People are buying influence. How is that supposed to be OK or normal?
I looked into this. They used to do business as Geniome Bank, and their job ads are for "crypto and marijuana". Almost no publicity, though they sponsored a few marijuana events. Chalopin usually shies away from press, so his personal involvement is odd. His son is also the chief digital officer of the company. Another curiosity is the old Farmington team is still there, including the presdient, and they still appear…
> The chairman of FBH is Jean Chalopin, who, along with being a co-creator of cartoon cop Inspector Gadget in the 1980s, is the chairman of Deltec Bank wat
There was another amazing exposé of Tether a few months ago all about this. I can’t remember if it was on Bloomberg, but that Inspector Gadget bit stuck out to me too.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Honestly I actually doubt he did anything he can be charged with. The whole point of crypto is that you are investing in something ABSOLUTELY NOBODY wants to take responsibility for. I find it amusing that there is now a call to apply the same rules for crypto exchanges. Didn't everyone hate traditional finance a few months ago?
He admitted to using client funds against the stated TOS. Embezzlement, Fraud, whatever - a crime did occur, regardless of if it was crypto, and every country I've run across has laws against that. Untangling how to charge him, and where, and digging up concrete enough evidence to file an indictment is going to take awhile of course. The post-bankruptcy CEO seems to be finding plenty. As with a lot of non-violent cri…
Yes. The investigation has to happen before the arrest. With violent crime, it's usually clear what happened; the question is who did it. With white-collar crime, sorting out what happened is complicated. With FTX, it's really complicated. Prosecutors only get one chance; if they take someone to trial on early evidence and lose, they usually can't come back later and try again.
But it doesn't all have to be figured out. Just enough for a long sentence. Known overt acts, such as buying US$300 million of Bahamas real estate with company funds and putting the real estate in a family name, are probably enough for grand theft.