81–90 of 98 posts
Maybe wait a little while? I feel like we don't even know 10% of what's likely to come out over the course of the next year.
They didn’t wait for the game of thrones books to complete. Just write the future! It’ll be as true as FTX’s accounting.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The wheels of the law grind slowly. Look at Elizabeth Holmes. The WSJ article that started her downfall came out in 2015. And she's still walking around free (for now).
Unless you wrote tornado.cash then they find you where you hide and jail you. Meanwhile SBF is walking around freely and giving interviews. *edit: phrasing
If I were the prosecutors, I would let him keep hanging himself with on the record interviews for as long as possible. Everything he says seems to make the case easier to win.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Im still surprised Flash Boys hasn’t materialized into a movie yet, maybe it’s a bit past the point of relevance now.
Moneyball and The Big Short were about major events that Americans noticed and cared about. Flash Boys wasn't. Most Americans never even heard of HFT. I still think it would be a great movie, but it never had the same relevance.
There have been repeated attempts to get a movie out of it so I assume there must be some good reason for the repeated failure.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They didn’t wait for the game of thrones books to complete. Just write the future! It’ll be as true as FTX’s accounting.
Can’t wait for the final episode in the FTX serious where out of nowhere SBF suddenly stabs Carolina Ellison and her pet iguana decides to take out its rage by destroying her office chair.
Related: Apple is reportedly nearing a deal for the rights to Michael Lewis’ upcoming book on Sam Bankman-Fried and FTX.[^1] Lewis is the author of The Big Short and Moneyball. [1]: https://deadline.com/2022/11/apple-deal-michael-lewis-book-c...
Im still surprised Flash Boys hasn’t materialized into a movie yet, maybe it’s a bit past the point of relevance now.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why do you think the miniseries will take his side? The “white collar crime miniseries” genre is generally not flattering to those involved.
For some reason a lot of people think SBF had super connections that will let him get away with crimes. A lot of it reads as very politically partisan (he gave money to Democrats therefor they won't prosecute) and not based in reality.
>...not based in reality
Epstein has been investigated for 20 years, during one of his trials the judge's son was killed by a pizza delivery guy, assassinated after opening the door, Epstein was only caught in 2019.
In the 2008 crisis only one guy went to prison, and he was an Egyptian.
In the HSBC carter money laundering investigations, no one went to prison.
Kerpeles (Mt Gox) didn't go to prison, Michinsky (Celsius) didn't go to prison, and they didn't donate to the current president or members of the board investigating them.
On the other hand both Do Kwon and Kumbhani are fugitives (Terra and Bitconnect).
Now look at who are SBF's and Ellison's parents and who they worked with, and look at who took donations from SBF's mom before FTX and who took money from SBF, and look at what the media are writing about SBF and how they never seem to mention the words fraud or crime or any of these, and if you don't want to put 2 and 2 together after this, then well... there are people who believe in ghosts and others who believe in UFO's and vampires and Santa, so you don't have it that bad, but please realize that your inability to see the truth when it stands 2 inches in front of your face (I assume blindness so I won't call you a shill), does not mean that the truth is not standing 2 inches in front of your face (as I said we're all humans and some believe in gremlins and fairies so it happens to anyone).
>politically partisan
French so I really don't care about American democrats or republicans, and SBF and his guys donated to both so..
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is incredible that the guy has been shadowing SBF for months and this happens.
Are you seriously suggesting that it’s a coincedence and not deliberate action on the side of Lewis? It’s not like there has been a shortage of people being perplexed by FTX/Alameda’s ability to seemingly print money, and it’s not like he wouldn’t be able to smell a potentially great story ahead of time.
So this isn’t really a big story yet, is it? I’m staying at my parents’ house for thanksgiving and when I asked them about it they both had no idea what I was talking about. My mom faintly remembered something about some crypto guy or something, but “FTX” didn’t ring a bell. This was very surprising to me because they are older and watch the news on television every day. I think their schedule is fox news from 5-6, t…
> an international ponzi scheme involving politicians and journalists We have no evidence any politicians or journalists were compromised. (Journalists at no-name outlets writing puff pieces is unfortunately banal.) That makes this a crypto story, and one whose victims are particularly unsympathetic at that. Those have a niche. But they aren’t mainstream.
I'm not really a fan of WSJ or NYT but calling them no-name outlets is a bit much.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Politicians were involved through donations. Whether to call that "compromised" is left as an exercise to the reader.
> Politicians were involved through donations. Whether to call that "compromised" is left as an exercise to the reader. Plenty of people hopelessly throw money at politicians. Most get no remuneration. Again, there is a paranoid subculture that assumes every donation brings legislative power, and for them, this is a relevant story. Most do not because, in most cases, it does not.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Politicians were involved through donations. Whether to call that "compromised" is left as an exercise to the reader. Plenty of people hopelessly throw money at politicians. Most get no remuneration. Again, there is a paranoid subculture that assumes every donation brings legislative power, and for them, this is a relevant story. Most do not because, in most cases, it does not.
> Plenty of people hopelessly throw money at politicians. Those people throw tens or hundreds of dollars. Not tens of millions of dollars. Big difference. > Again, there is a paranoid subculture that assumes every donation brings legislative power No I don't believe the $3 Bernie was asking for would bring any legislative power but $30,000,000?
Nope. I’ve been close to New York, California and Wyoming federal politics for a short bit. There is always someone throwing big money in a bill market. They get suave dinners and photo shoots. But nobody takes what they’re saying seriously. Enough is done, in private, to keep the dollars rolling. But for powerful incumbents, there are more big donors than swing senators. (The non-swing guys can’t push the margin. But they still get dollars, because the point is the photo shoot.)