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

Martin Shkreli indictment [pdf]

bloomberglaw.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 182 posts

Re: Martin Shkreli indictment [pdf]

#151

Post by micwawa »

jotux wrote: post #140
micwawa wrote: post #129

When dealing with sociopaths, you have think of them like diseases and not even begin to attempt to relate to them in human terms. Saying "I'm glad that Skreli went to jail" should be stated with the the same joy or sense of justice as saying "I'm glad Ebola was contained." Saying something like "I hope Ebola learned their lesson, hahaha" shows that you don't understand Ebola. There's a lot of wealthy sociopaths out…

>When dealing with sociopaths, you have think of them like diseases and not even begin to attempt to relate to them in human terms. I personally believe you should never dehumanize people, no matter how bad they are. Once you write off certain people as non-human it becomes much too easy to commit atrocities.

If you're the victim of a sociopath, it's easier to sleep at night thinking that what happened was just some accident of nature. To accept the alternative, that another "human being" did what they did for no other reason than "because they could" is a recipe for a lot of suppressed internal rage.

Re: Martin Shkreli indictment [pdf]

#152

Post by TDL »

samstave wrote: post #78
nayshins wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From Wikipedia: "Naked short selling, or naked shorting, is the practice of short-selling a tradable asset of any kind without first borrowing the security or ensuring that the security can be borrowed, as is conventionally done in a short sale." It is really easy to lose your shirt with a naked short.

From whom does one do this borrowing?

Look at the agreement you sign when opening a brokerage account. You give the brokerage firm the right to loan out any shares of stock you own. I believe this only happens in accounts that have margin (you do have to have a margin account to short), but I am not entirely certain.

Re: Martin Shkreli indictment [pdf]

#153

Post by pdeuchler »

ossreality wrote: post #126
pdeuchler wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>>> "You will change the atmosphere by yelling "fire" in a crowded theater and once it's done, there is no going back." >>> "Posturing language exists to make a claim to credibility. It serves a real purpose and is used in an instrumental way, for the purpose of conducting business on the terms of those who use it." >>> "enabling their threats to be real to some degree." >>> "There is no reason to deny him the possib…

I sure don't? Mind not being cryptic? Are we really going to have this stupid god damn conversation again? Threatening speech is not protected. Acting like a fucking jackass might be protected speech but it doesn't protect you from the forum of public opinion. Ironically, pretty much everytime I see someone whining about free speech, they're talking about it non-governmental contexts... the ultimate irony of you tell…

we don't jail people for being "slightly sociopathic" "assholes", we jail them for breaking the law. Attempting to construe someone's unrelated speech, even as sociopathic as it may come off, as justification for jailing them (remember, for securities fraud) is terribly dishonest and a very dangerous slippery slope.

Also, by the way, threatening speech is technically protected under the first amendment [1]. Dunno why you brought up the government/public opinion topic.

Here's a lawyer, something I am not, on the matter, although I think we're devolving from my initial point: [0] https://popehat.com/2012/09/19/three-generations-of-a-hackne... [1] https://popehat.com/2012/09/19/three-generations-of-a-hackne...

To address my empathy comment, I think it's in very poor taste to declare someone "sociopathic" (i.e. shades of mentally ill) if you're not a doctor, close friend/family member, or otherwise licensed professional. Doubly so to make such a judgement based off a small sampling of online commentary. We should all strive to be empathetic and employ a principle of charity when making such judgements, especially before we know the facts.

Re: Martin Shkreli indictment [pdf]

#154

Post by rhodimus »

blueintegral wrote: post #47
danielcampos93 wrote: post #24

What I'm curious is how this affects the Wu Tang Clan's album he bought? http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/10/business/media/martin-shkr...

Someone filed a FOIA with the FBI to try to get them to release it: https://twitter.com/wisemana/status/677510714236510209 Seems like it's unlikely that you can just FOIA arbitrary data from a CD or hard drive that's been seized during an investigation though.

Sadly they haven't got it: https://twitter.com/NewYorkFBI/status/677597263540191232

Re: Martin Shkreli indictment [pdf]

#155

Post by samstave »

querulous wrote: post #144
samstave wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From whom does one do this borrowing?

generally from your broker (who borrows them from their other clients who own those shares). there's some institutional lending also

Apologies for my complete ignorance -- but doesnt that sound super shady?

Re: Martin Shkreli indictment [pdf]

#156

Post by discreteevent »

AVTizzle wrote: post #60
JayHost wrote: post #43

My first reaction to his arrest was joy and then I saw comments about him getting "beat up in jail" to put it lightly. People who say those kinds of things are no better than him. Possibly worse. The solution to dealing with people like him is to be able to separate them from society or fix the system so it can no longer be exploited so "easily". He may have hurt a lot of people but it's been through proxy as far as…

>>The Wolf of Wall Street was a glorification of this type of behavior and a lot of people saw Jordan in that movie as a "Hero" Interesting analogy, and I'm glad you pointed this out. I was disgusted by Wolf of Wall Street, and even more disgusted by how exalted Belfort became after. So many friends and acquaintances admired and aspired towards what they saw in the film - that was the worst part of it for me. I just…

I went to a talk by Alan Parker (probably more than 20 years ago). In it he talked about watching a screening of his film Midnight Express. There is a scene in the film where Billy, the main character, bites out the tongue of another man at the end of a fight. He intended the scene to be tragic. It was supposed to show how prison had brought Billy to a place where he had completely lost everything he used to be. But, to Parker's dismay, some of the audience cheered because all they could see was the vengeance that Billy was taking on the other character.

Parker said that he resolved after that not to use violence in a film in that way again.

Re: Martin Shkreli indictment [pdf]

#157

Post by bsder »

nkrisc wrote: post #96
FLUX-YOU wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Like Morgan on the Walking Dead. I do believe Martin is a good guy on the wrong path. Not sure how you can defend that with this floating around. I’m definitely the real fucking deal. This is not a fucking act. I threatened that fucking guy and his fucking kids because he fucking took $3 million from me and he ended up paying me back. He called my bluff. He said, “You’re not fucking going to go after me.” [I said] “…

Nonetheless, being beat up in jail prior to being convicted of a crime (or after) isn't exactly part of what is supposed to be a fair judicial system. We ought not to punish people for merely being accused of or indicted for a crime. Today it's this asshole, tomorrow it could be you.

People have really forgotten that its supposed to be "innocent until proven guilty".

Too many people have faith in the judicial system. I wish they would all have to defend themselves, just once, from an unsubstantiated criminal charge.

They would find out, very quickly, just how scary the system can be.

Re: Martin Shkreli indictment [pdf]

#158

Post by ggreer »

chipsy wrote: post #106
Disruptive_Dave wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know, I take that as a nerdy white dude who desperately seeks attention trying to impress the hip hop heads out there (that kind of talk is extremely common in the rap game).

I disagree with this form of dismissal as a rule. If someone says something and then says "it was a joke", "it was a game", "I was just making a point", that doesn't cancel out the words and their impact - social atmosphere is not an intellectually pristine environment. You will change the atmosphere by yelling "fire" in a crowded theater and once it's done, there is no going back. Likewise, if we dismiss someone's s…

FYI, the "fire in a crowded theater" phrase comes from Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. in Schenck v. United States[1]. Writing for the majority (actually it was a unanimous decision), Holmes wrote:

The most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man in falsely shouting fire in a theatre and causing a panic.

Many people nod their heads at this example, but they forget that Holmes was using it to justify the imprisonment of a man for leafletting against the draft. Those who earnestly reference "fire in a crowded theater" would likely stop if they knew its history. If anything, it argues against their point.

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schenck_v._United_States

Re: Martin Shkreli indictment [pdf]

#159

Post by shiv86 »

ChuckMcM wrote: post #28
amateur_soclgst wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I found it funnier how they tried to short sell $1M of stock and somehow got $7M in the hole. Must have been some leverage on that deal :v

Actually that is very "easy" to do, first you short sell some stock (naked short) for $1M, then the stocks value goes up by $8M. You are asked to cover your short and even after your $1M you are still left holding $7M in liabilities.

This is incorrect. You can’t talk about absolute $8mill gain without talking about the total market cap (total value) of the stock. What would have happened that the company its not increase by $8mill but increase by 8 times the current value which is more possible to happen for small cap stocks.

Re: Martin Shkreli indictment [pdf]

#160

Post by Disruptive_Dave »

chipsy wrote: post #106
Disruptive_Dave wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know, I take that as a nerdy white dude who desperately seeks attention trying to impress the hip hop heads out there (that kind of talk is extremely common in the rap game).

I disagree with this form of dismissal as a rule. If someone says something and then says "it was a joke", "it was a game", "I was just making a point", that doesn't cancel out the words and their impact - social atmosphere is not an intellectually pristine environment. You will change the atmosphere by yelling "fire" in a crowded theater and once it's done, there is no going back. Likewise, if we dismiss someone's s…

Well, no, I was specifically responding to the idea that he's a bad person because he made a few particular comments in a fricken' hip hop interview.
Post reply on HN