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

The United States of America vs. Samuel Bankman-Fried Indictment [pdf]

justice.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

411–420 of 748 posts

Re: The United States of America vs. Samuel Bankman-Fried Indictment [pdf]

#411

Post by mattnewton »

indigodaddy wrote: post #380
lr4444lr wrote: post #376

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They watched their own flesh and blood son transition with breakneck speed from a high rolling billionaire who hobnobbed with society's elites to facing spending the best years of his life in prison, a disgrace to his family and their legacy. How do you think you'd cope with that psychological ordeal?

Sure as hell wouldn’t laugh and put my fingers in my ears during a hearing. They are professional lawyers. Time to man up and not put your son at even more risk. Who knows how involved they’ve been in his shenanigans up til now, but it’s time to stop the madness..

This reads like a stress response to me. I don’t think realizing your child is probably going to live behind bars for the rest of your life and your family will never recover is something you “man up” through.

Re: The United States of America vs. Samuel Bankman-Fried Indictment [pdf]

#412

Post by optimalsolver »

tasuki wrote: post #382
brewdad wrote: post #373

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe they already got their millions secured away in some untouchable country and don't really care what happens at this point.

They were already quite well off, now their son is in trouble. "My son is going to prison but I have secured my millions so it's fine" is generally not a thing.

You'd be surprised.

Re: The United States of America vs. Samuel Bankman-Fried Indictment [pdf]

#413

Post by anonporridge »

syzarian wrote: post #387
tasuki wrote: post #382

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They were already quite well off, now their son is in trouble. "My son is going to prison but I have secured my millions so it's fine" is generally not a thing.

I think that it is a thing for a shockingly large percent of parents. Historically children were the retirement plan (in addition to labor for the family). That type of thinking is fairly common.

> Historically children were the retirement plan

They still are. It's just that the retirement plan has been socialized to the level of the nation state. The labor of the young takes care of the old. This is literally true in the case of social security which is funded by taxing current productive labor.

This isn't necessarily bad, because it's the way it's always been. But it is something like a multi-generational ponzi scheme. It can work for a very long time, but eventually, the last generation is left holding the bag with no one to pass it onto.

Re: The United States of America vs. Samuel Bankman-Fried Indictment [pdf]

#414

Post by totalZero »

massysett wrote: post #395
pseingatl wrote: post #127

Can we discus recovery? The Madoff trustee was able to recover something like 90% of the Madoff Ponzi. Alameda and FTX's real estate purchases have value, as do their VC investments, purchases of bank stock, etc. In other words, it's not all gone. My understanding is that even some of the political contributions can be clawed back. FTX's purchases of IOU's (i.e., crypto) that declined in value are not likely to be re…

The problem is opportunity cost. People invested in Madoff to grow their money. So if I invest $100 in Madoff and ten years later they say “we recovered $90, congrats,” yeah that’s better than nothing. But if I had put that into a legitimate investment, maybe I’d have $180. Other folks got money out of Madoff during his scam years, and the trustee says “I’m taking that money back to pay back others.” So much of crypt…

Shkreli got hard time even though investors didn't lose money due to his fraud.

There isn't a performance threshold beyond which fraud ceases to be criminal.

Re: The United States of America vs. Samuel Bankman-Fried Indictment [pdf]

#415

Post by smcl »

pseingatl wrote: post #127

Can we discus recovery? The Madoff trustee was able to recover something like 90% of the Madoff Ponzi. Alameda and FTX's real estate purchases have value, as do their VC investments, purchases of bank stock, etc. In other words, it's not all gone. My understanding is that even some of the political contributions can be clawed back. FTX's purchases of IOU's (i.e., crypto) that declined in value are not likely to be re…

Have they not just spunked it into cryptocurrencies?

Re: The United States of America vs. Samuel Bankman-Fried Indictment [pdf]

#416

Post by buggythebug »

iosjunkie wrote: post #404
buggythebug wrote: post #401

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

Suggesting that one should not trust someone based on their looks is based af. Any other sage wisdom to bestow upon the people of Hacker News?

They look like gremlins. And from her interview especially she talks about how life is better on drugs.

Re: The United States of America vs. Samuel Bankman-Fried Indictment [pdf]

#417

Post by catominor »

anonporridge wrote: post #410
Aunche wrote: post #409

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is mainstream media being sensationalist per usual. This is what the original Coindesk article wrote. "They appeared to oscillate between dejection and defiance, at times holding their heads in their hands and clasping their hands. Bankman-Fried’s mother audibly laughed several times when her son was referred to as a “fugitive” and his father occasionally put his fingers in his ears as if to drown out the sound…

Lol. When Coindesk is bringing more nuanced news reporting than CNBC, you know things are whack.

things be whack

Re: The United States of America vs. Samuel Bankman-Fried Indictment [pdf]

#418

Post by trident5000 »

lr4444lr wrote: post #376
indigodaddy wrote: post #370

From https://www.cnbc.com/2022/12/13/sam-bankman-fried-denied-bai... : “Bankman-Fried's parents were animated during the proceeding, at times laughing or putting their fingers in their ears, according to Coindesk.” … what in the world.. I guess they really think they are going to somehow get him out of this.. how do they not understand that this type of behavior is not in any way helpful to him?

They watched their own flesh and blood son transition with breakneck speed from a high rolling billionaire who hobnobbed with society's elites to facing spending the best years of his life in prison, a disgrace to his family and their legacy. How do you think you'd cope with that psychological ordeal?

Best years? More like all the years.

Re: The United States of America vs. Samuel Bankman-Fried Indictment [pdf]

#419

Post by jamiek88 »

dragonwriter wrote: post #337
Macha wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Various legal systems have standards for the form for which documents should be submitted to them which are surprisingly nitpicky in terms of items like fonts and spacing. Of course, these standards were created when typewriters were the dominant use case, so had deference to what typewriters could actually do. Even though most of the typewriter use has fallen out of fashion, the standards remain, with the results th…

Consistency also means that rules that state “pages” are meaningful limits, not something subject to unresitricted gaming, and that they retain that over time.

Also a method my high school English teacher used to standardise pages after one too many (i.e. one) comic sans 18pt hand ins.

We could use a computer at a certain font, linespace and margin so a 10 page essay was consistent.

Which was lots better than other teachers who just said ‘nope, handwritten please’.

Re: The United States of America vs. Samuel Bankman-Fried Indictment [pdf]

#420

Post by throwaway742 »

cjensen wrote: post #142
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People keep saying this, but honestly, does anyone really think it makes one iota of difference? Fact is that there is a huge paper trail of SBF's malfeasance, nevermind the fact that his co-conspirators appear to be turning against him. If anything, his interviews seemed to be his attempt to argue for negligence over malice in his case. Yes, SBF is going to prison for a long time. No, I don't think anyone has made a…

Yes it has made a difference. In white-collar crimes, prosecutors have to prove intent. That means they have to somehow find evidence that the defendant meant to do various things improperly. SBF has literally given interviews where he has stated the required intent for some of the crimes. As an unrelated aside, note that this is also a way of punishing lower classes of people more severely. If you shoplift, prosecut…

At least under CA law they do have to prove intent for shoplifting.

>Shoplifting is defined as entering a commercial establishment with an intent to commit larceny while it's open during regular business hours and the value of the property taken, or intended to be taken, is $950 or less. Any other entry into a commercial business with intent to commit larceny is burglary.

Post reply on HN