201–210 of 533 posts
So much for the conspiracy theory people were floating here about her being protected by her influential family and powerful connections.
We will have to wait and see what deal they make if pleading guilty.
Biannual reshare of a pilot I wrote for a TV parody of Theranos: http://www.blakeross.com/pricks.pdf :)
Are you bummed that they didn't go with your screenplay for the big screen adaptation starring Jennifer Lawrence [1]? :) [1] https://www.imdb.com/title/tt5795144/
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They did. They had two devices, the "Edison" and the "MiniLab". The Edison was intended to run a full panel of blood tests, both chemical and immunological assays, off a finger stick of blood. It was also intended to allow Theranos to function as its own lab. The Minilab was intended to run a full panel of blood tests I believe off a larger venous sample, and was expected to be marketed to existing labs (at this poin…
Do you believe Theranos could have beee successful company with less delusional management? (Honest question for a HN colleague for whom I have tremendous respect.)
Does anybody know if Theranos got started with at least an idea how to accomplish what they wanted to do? From what I have heard in interviews they started with the thought "Doing xxx would be super useful" but didn't have an approach for accomplishing this but instead took in money and tried to figure it out. It's like me saying "An antimatter drive would revolutionize space exploration" and starting to collect mone…
This interview with John Carreyrou [1], the Wall Street Journal journalist who is largely responsible for exposing Theranos, goes into a lot of detail. It's long, so if you want a shorter answer, jump to the question "What technology did Theranos actually develop?": Basically there were three iterations of the technology. The first one used microfluidics, which are basically the repurposing of the micro-fabrication t…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The American Criminal Justice system rightly faces many criticisms, especially serious charges for being used against minorities. But yes, knowing that even the most powerful person in the country is not above the law and can and is prosecuted seriously, and that scammers like Holmes and Balwani are made to pay for their crimes.... this kind of thing is certainly what makes the US unique among nations.
it is also what makes this country great. not that someone like Trump understand that. For a society to function harmoniously, it must believe that their society is just, and that those who commit crimes will face justice, whether its pusher on the street, or the President of the United States, and that, not only will justice be served, but clemency granted in equitable fashion when so deserved. For those interested,…
You mean, the kind of justice that Richard Nixon faced?
I feel that any criminal president that falls short of being a baby-eating monster will get a pardon, instead of a jumpsuit.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sounds like she drank too much of the "drop out of college and disrupt the valley" kool aid.
She certainly is not a good person but a lot of blame should be put on the VCs and board members. They could have figured things out if they had bothered to look.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That’s an interesting read on what Shkreli did vs Holmes. At least Holmes “victims” AFAIK were mostly rich folks losing other people’s money they’re gambling with and should have known better. Shkreli fleeced normal folks just looking to get their day meds.
> At least Holmes “victims” AFAIK were mostly rich folks why would that make it any better?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What's so bad about the black turtleneck?
In the tech industry, if it's worn as a uniform, it's probably a dead give-away that the person should be avoided (especially if there's any other supporting evidence related to negative behavior). It's a Jobsian mimic. There was one Steve Jobs, he was extraordinary in some ways, and he wasn't very nice. There isn't going to be another, he was the product of a unique circumstance. The next great person/s will be thei…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My recollection was that there was someone involved early on who had substantial experience with microfluidics, but I'm having trouble pinning down who exactly it was.
Potentially Ian Gibbons? He was the original Chief Scientist who died by suicide after legal issues arose within Theranos over a patent dispute. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ian_Gibbons_(biochemist)
While Theranos was flying high, much was made of the company's connections to DC power elite - Kissenger on the board, etc.[1]. And the implication usually seemed to be that the deep bench of Serious And Important And Powerful People allowed the company to get away with things that otherwise would not have been possible. I think it's worth pausing to consider: when's the last time you heard of a startup CEO/CTO team…
> But I do have to wonder whether the degree of attention from the DOJ has more to do with avenging the reputational and possibly financial losses of those same board members, than garden-variety "the DOJ prosecutes fraud". Or these two are convenient patsies.. Did they really lose money? Theranos had huge contracts for blood testing at major national pharmacy chains for a year or two, and if you follow the timeline,…