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

Elizabeth Holmes loses bid to stay out of prison

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 315 posts

Re: Elizabeth Holmes loses bid to stay out of prison

#201

Post by gumby »

explaininjs wrote: post #126
gumby wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't want any elites getting special treatment either... These days I normally roll my eyes and stop reading when I encounter someone saying "the elites" but in this case it is 100% appropriate: she was a member of a wealthy elite, and both deliberately and casually used her connections from the get go.

Did you mean "causally"? Not sure the degree of formality is relevant.

No, (and I'm not sure that "causally" would even result in a comprehensible sentence).

Her deliberate use was exploiting her very close childhood friendship with Tim Draper's kids to get Draper to fund her and use his network to find other investors and to get the message out. Another was her using her network to get a number of distracting and bizarre board members (ex generals and the like), especially when Vally VCs (other than Draper) refused to give the company the time of day.

The casual way I noticed was how she just slipped into a milieu of Ted talks, various "though leader" pieces, and circulated at Davos and wherever. No gawky fish-out-of-water period.

This is quite different from the typical nerd "has to get used to things" situation and gave her tremendous credibility with the rubes outside the valley.

I would drive or bike past their office on Page Mill and for a long time had no idea what they did, despite having been in the life sciences myself at the time. They were weirdly physically in Silicon Valley but simultaneously not part of it.

Re: Elizabeth Holmes loses bid to stay out of prison

#202

Post by 00F_ »

ok_dad wrote: post #188
LanceJones wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are 400,000+ Beta users currently (US and Canada). You are being fooled by the headlines. The people in the EU have a legitimate beef (not being able to use the functionality). "test a system with our own lives" is silly hyperbole and you know it.

> "test a system with our own lives" is silly hyperbole and you know it. No, I actually believe that, because I have some morals and ethics around introducing dangerous and untested black-box AI into a several-ton machine with no physical consrtaints as to it's location (aka: a moving car), as in I wouldn't do it myself nor use a product like Tesla that was developed in such a shoddy manner. It's pretty fucking rude…

so when they introduced drive by wire, and just put it out there on the roads without telling anyone, that was reckless? or any of the countless other designs that have led us to the modern cars we have now? how about all the severe recalls, not over the air recalls that tesla gets press for but real safety issues? GM and the others have tons and tons of real physical safety recalls, way more than tesla, and thats not shoddy to you? thats not reckless to you? thats foolish. fsd as it is now probably drives more safely than a teenager. so do you want to take all teenagers off the road? and where is your crusade against drunk driving which kills way, way more people than fsd ever will every single year. doesnt bother you. no, your issue isnt with safety or with ethics or principles or anything like that. your issue is with elon musk. because you read brain-rot mainstream media all day who use lies and misdirection to paint elon musk and tesla as evil.

Re: Elizabeth Holmes loses bid to stay out of prison

#203

Post by JumpCrisscross »

from wrote: post #196
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry, I was unclear. I meant people shouldn’t go to jail unless it’s violence, corruption or fraud. Then jail time should be on the table. (But never mandatory.)

What about receiving stolen property, perjury, campaign finance violations, etc? There are enough ethically flexible people out there and if you remove the major deterrent from doing these societally bad but nonviolent things I think occurrences of them would all increase a decent amount.

> receiving stolen property, perjury, campaign finance violations, etc

Campaign finance violations seem clear cut corruption. (Again, not mandatory jail sentencing. But jail is on the table.)

Perjury and contempt obviously need the capacity to put someone in jail. I resolve the moral discrepancy with their short durations. Theft is the elephant in the room for this framework, and I don't have a good answer for it.

Re: Elizabeth Holmes loses bid to stay out of prison

#204

Post by LanceJones »

lawn wrote: post #147
LanceJones wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are 400,000+ Beta users currently (US and Canada). You are being fooled by the headlines. The people in the EU have a legitimate beef (not being able to use the functionality). "test a system with our own lives" is silly hyperbole and you know it.

That's true. You're testing it with the lives of others on the road or walking beside it too.

It's ADAS Level 2. Tesla is one of many. And are you equally concerned aboout parents who allow their 15 and 16 year olds to drive on the same streets with no-to-little training... and where the parent cannot easily grab the steering wheel or press the brake?

Re: Elizabeth Holmes loses bid to stay out of prison

#205

Post by [deleted] »

tptacek wrote: post #25
ExMachina73 wrote: post #18

Any bets she actually reports? Odds anyone? I feel a woman of her means and personality may try to disappear, go off grid. Does she still have access to money? Were her assets frozen?

People say stuff like this because it's fun to talk about, not because it's a live issue. Do you actually want to bet? There aren't a lot of serious odds you could suggest for this where I wouldn't bet she shows up, like everybody else does.

[deleted]

Re: Elizabeth Holmes loses bid to stay out of prison

#206

Post by JumpCrisscross »

simonh wrote: post #148
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 2019 Musk publicly stated Model 3's would support robotic taxi functionality in 2020 No evidence these forecasts were made in bad faith. Delusion isn’t criminal. It’s mis-selling in the here and now, in absolute terms, in a way that causes damage, that is problematic.

When you sell a capability you are making a commitment. The fact that you deluded yourself about it does not get you off the hook. You are still responsible for your claims. Or should be.

> when you sell a capability you are making a commitment

Sure. And if you sold the promise of future capability with no intent on delivering it, that's fraud. But if you try, it isn't. And if you fail, your customers should have a claim on you. But I don't think it should be a crime.

Re: Elizabeth Holmes loses bid to stay out of prison

#207

Post by ok_dad »

jcampbell1 wrote: post #200
ok_dad wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "test a system with our own lives" is silly hyperbole and you know it. No, I actually believe that, because I have some morals and ethics around introducing dangerous and untested black-box AI into a several-ton machine with no physical consrtaints as to it's location (aka: a moving car), as in I wouldn't do it myself nor use a product like Tesla that was developed in such a shoddy manner. It's pretty fucking rude…

[flagged]

That was massively rude and uncharitable, I'm not engaging with someone like you.

Re: Elizabeth Holmes loses bid to stay out of prison

#208

Post by LanceJones »

ok_dad wrote: post #188
LanceJones wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are 400,000+ Beta users currently (US and Canada). You are being fooled by the headlines. The people in the EU have a legitimate beef (not being able to use the functionality). "test a system with our own lives" is silly hyperbole and you know it.

> "test a system with our own lives" is silly hyperbole and you know it. No, I actually believe that, because I have some morals and ethics around introducing dangerous and untested black-box AI into a several-ton machine with no physical consrtaints as to it's location (aka: a moving car), as in I wouldn't do it myself nor use a product like Tesla that was developed in such a shoddy manner. It's pretty fucking rude…

It's ADAS Level 2. Tesla is one of many. And are you equally concerned aboout parents who allow their 15 and 16 year olds to drive on the same streets with no-to-little training... and where the parent cannot easily grab the steering wheel or press the brake?

Re: Elizabeth Holmes loses bid to stay out of prison

#209

Post by pclmulqdq »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #195
pclmulqdq wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Generally, when you don't know that a product definitely can do something, you don't sell it saying that it has the "capability" to do it. That's fraud.

> when you don't know that a product definitely can do something, you don't sell it saying that it has the "capability" to do it. That's fraud. Capability is defined as "the facility or potential for an indicated use or deployment" [1]. There are other definitions. But selling capability based on future potential is not fraudulent, unless you say the capability is present. [1] https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictiona…

I think you're reading the word "potential" incorrectly for the context. Dictionaries are tricky things to read, because they tend to incorrectly communicate nuances. The capability to do something means that it can be done, not that it might be able to be done. Otherwise, my Honda has the capability to fly.

Re: Elizabeth Holmes loses bid to stay out of prison

#210

Post by ok_dad »

00F_ wrote: post #202
ok_dad wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "test a system with our own lives" is silly hyperbole and you know it. No, I actually believe that, because I have some morals and ethics around introducing dangerous and untested black-box AI into a several-ton machine with no physical consrtaints as to it's location (aka: a moving car), as in I wouldn't do it myself nor use a product like Tesla that was developed in such a shoddy manner. It's pretty fucking rude…

so when they introduced drive by wire, and just put it out there on the roads without telling anyone, that was reckless? or any of the countless other designs that have led us to the modern cars we have now? how about all the severe recalls, not over the air recalls that tesla gets press for but real safety issues? GM and the others have tons and tons of real physical safety recalls, way more than tesla, and thats no…

Well, drive by wire wasn't just put out there, it was tested on military jets for decades and the tech eventually got to cars. There are also testing rigs and failsafes for such designs, however Tesla is just putting a black-box AI on the roads in charge of massive vehicles.

I'm not going to engage with someone like you any longer, though, as you're being really fucking rude.

Post reply on HN