Who said I’m non-American?
Sorry, I was typing YOUR name but trying to respond to @Northern_Piper’s comments. I will correct this, but wanted to apologize to you first. Obviously I have had too much rum to address the proper poster, but not enough to have stopped caring about responding to the injustice of the world.
Thought that might be it (meaning Northern_Piper, not me).
Yeah, i think almost all US prison terms are too long. But this one seems commensurate with other US prison terms.
Michael Lewis wrote a whole book about the guy in which he casts him as a person who doesn’t care at all about other humans. And Lewis was on SBF’s side.
Based on my interpretation, reporting, and the like, I kind of get the feeling that SBF was treating the whole thing as a game - make the numbers “bigger” (like me adding to my giant pile of gold in World of Warcraft by grinding and playing the Auction House) without any feeling that it was all “real”.
At the end of the day it was, like all modern banking (in general, specifics MATTER in this case!) just numbers in a spreadsheet.
So he didn’t consider the risks, the investors, or oversight as people or valid things, just obstacles in the way of his speed-run to the high score. Sure, he knew intellectually that this wasn’t the case, but he acted like (and still does!) he could still have “won” if Mommy/Daddy/The Regulators hadn’t taken away his controller. And points to the rebound of crypto as his proof of this.
Again, it reminds me of some of the pro-gaming streamers out there that are accused of using aim-bots or other manipulations to win records or tourneys. When caught, they claim it’s just to make things more exciting, or they “forgot” to turn off the mods they use for casual streaming, but that they were good/lucky enough to have done the same even without the cheats.
Error! Error! Norman, Coordinate!
Anyone who doesn’t think that he was an intentional sociopath should check out this Google doc that he wrote that was in evidence.
Yeah, when I read that earlier any hint that he was just a well-meaning altruist lost in a dream cloud of his own unrealistic aspirations died a quick death. The guy was a grifter from day one - he just didn’t care.
Is there a list of the hyperlinked docs referenced in that list?
Not that I’ve been able to find.
How frustrating was it to tap on those dead links?
Now they have to go after the parents to claw back their stolen gains. And maybe go after them criminally as well.
Can you even imagine how tedious those family dinner conversations must have been? You probably could barely breathe through the smugness. Maybe they should have taught their special little star child about the real world instead of that he was perfect and better than the rest of humanity.
One aspect of this that annoys me is he apparently believed that he was going to make the world better through “effective altruism.” He seemed to think that he was accomplishing this by living with roommates, except that they lived in a $35 million penthouse and owned dozens of other properties in the Bahamas. And his parents also were given a multi-million dollar estate and millions in cash. So very altruistic, as least as far as benefiting him and those close to him.
I am very unconvinced Bankman-Fried believed anything of the sort. He gave it lip service.
“Effective Altruism” has always just meant “The most effective thing you can do with your money is give it all to me, because I can use it better than you”. In other words, it’s never had anything to do with altruism.
Or effectiveness. Just another grift companies use to deflect from poor economic performance, like ESG.
Effective altruism by individuals doesn’t have to be eyewash. In SBF’s case it certainly was. Several other tycoons have fallen into the same hole.
And there’s a darn good argument to be made that instead of e.g. Bill Gates controlling many billions of dollars and deploying some of them legitimately both effectively and altruistically, an overall better outcome for humanity would be for that collective value / wealth to have remained in the hands of his employees and customers, not him, in the first place.
But given the current reality of winner-take-almost-all global capitalism, I’d much rather see tycoons following the Gates & Buffett model than the SBF & Musk & Koch model.
What kind of guy was SBF like? What were his underlying psychological motives? The correct and proper answer is, “Who cares?” Motives and character are difficult enough to fathom with people you know; basing these evaluations on news articles is generally speaking an exercise in projection, perhaps imagination. You don’t need to understand the perp to implement specific and general deterence.
Have armchair, will speculate
So natually I’ll offer up another theory. Subject was a quiet weirdo in high school who was admitted to one of the finest colleges in the land. He lived in a coop in college and did his share of the chores with no reports of eccentric behavior, admittedly in a college known for its eccentrics. He graduated and launched a billion dollar crypto Ponzi scheme, which was destined to fail like all Ponzi schemes. The only way to make it work criminally is to either line up a safe country to escape to or to stash away funds in secret accounts and keep a low media profile so that you receive a slap on the wrist like most white collar criminals. SBF didn’t do any of that: he was as delusional as most Ponzi crooks.
My take? In high school he suffered from social anxiety. Those with social anxiety have difficulty creating and sustaining connections with others. However, that does not imply that they do not want to form connections. In SBF’s case, yeah I’d say that he did. How many people organize collective living after they’ve graduated college? How many CEOs gave as many interviews as this guy? (Well there’s Elon Musk: SBF may not be a record holder in this regards, but he certainly was comfortably in the top decile.) This was a guy who liked making connnections and couldn’t shut up even after his arrest. He got a charge from favorable attention, enough to paper over the absurdity of his criminal business plan.
Bankman-Fried seeking new trial; lawyers argue Judge Kaplan mishandled the trial and favoured the prosecution.
I think it really is a trap, that lures people who want to do good. There’s a lot of evidence that SBF started out idealistic. (i actually know a lot of his contemporaries at that college co-op he lived in, that is, people who lived there when he did. They were certainly not all rooting for him, but they were all surprised at how much of a mess he made of it.)
Also, SBF was certainly guilty of massive accounting malpractice. And of fraudulently moving money between what were supposed to be separate legal entities. It’s not 100% clear to me that he was running a ponzi scheme or thought he was cheating people.