4 ms·

lmaooooo. EA has always seemed like a bullshit larp for extremely online and naive people. i dont know how anyone took it seriously. in the end this is just an

lmaooooo. EA has always seemed like a bullshit larp for extremely online and naive people. i dont know how anyone took it seriously. in the end this is just another retelling of the same old boring finance lessons Buffet or Taleb or Burry or hundreds before them know. high leverage is the only way to get rich QUICK but it can wipe you out just as quickly. crypto is generally bullshit, the leaders are mostly grifters and its good to see the tide finally revealing them for who they are. no one seems to talk about how all the underlying concepts of finance apply identically to crypto as they do to any boring old currency, asset, stock, option or any financial instrument. but they do.. moving to a blockchain does not change any of that in the slightest. Sam is basically George Bluth now

HPMOR 4y ago
I'm sorry but these two points are extremely disconnected. EA really has no bearing on the financial mechanisms that undid SBF. Furthermore, although he was a prime donor to EA, I don't think his involvement with it necessarily discredits them.
- ryanobjc 4y ago
  He’s one of EA highest profiles adherents. EA style thinking permeates SBF. This is the world EAs want - the one they’ve been advocating for a long time. It’s just in this iteration it failed. If the chance of success was higher than X% vs the risk of failing, it was all worth it. That’s the kind of morally bankrupt philosophy EA pushes.
- moistly 4y ago
  > EA really has no bearing on the financial mechanisms that undid SBF. It had bearing on the ethical/moral decisions he has been making. EA has allowed him to justify doing blatantly illegal acts.
  - smk_ 4y ago
    It’s more likely he tried to cover up massive Alameda losses due to all the usual reasons people turn to illegal acts: shame, myopia, gambling addiction. One core EA principle is integrity. If he was actually “EA”, this wouldn’t have happened the way it did.
    - moistly 4y ago
      That’s no true Scotsman.
- astrange 4y ago
  Doesn’t discredit them but it does bankrupt them. What does discredit them is them claiming “we’re going to go on making charity effective and rational” as if everyone else who works at a nonprofit makes decisions with an Ouija board.
- wmf 4y ago
  There's a Twitter thread where SBF said he's willing to take unlimited risk, far beyond what is theoretically optimal, because it's for the good of humanity.
  - ChainOfFools 4y ago
    easy to say when youre taking on that unlimited risk using other people's - err, humanity's - money. No wonder SBF went hard into the social capital accumulation game almost immediately, buying off politicians and grandiose charitywashing gestures. His window to establish a network of elite string pullers was short and closing fast.
habitue 4y ago
Uh, what? SBF being a fraud and a criminal doesn't indict EA in any way. He was also an avid wearer of t-shirts and unkempt hair, are those things are discredited now as well?
- skinnymuch 4y ago
  He didn’t wear that stuff as motivation for his money and power chasing. Nor did the tshirt and unkempt hair community galvanize around him and accept his purported billions.
- astrange 4y ago
  He was funding a lot of it and they didn’t seem to particularly care that he was obviously a fraud. Their earn to give position actually commands you to become such a fraud to give them money. Which they spend on castles (https://twitter.com/simpleteo/status/1591069362076590081 https://twitter.com/simpleteo/status/1591069362076590081) and pretending all other charity is “ineffective and selfish” because it doesn’t have “effective altruism” right in the name.
  - habitue 4y ago
    I mean, was he *obviously* a fraud? You could easily short FTT if you thought that was the case. Additionally, any number of hedge funds could have, and it would have collapsed if they had (the reason this unravelled was a big sale of the token) Maybe you mean in hindsight he was obviously a fraud? But then that criticism doesn't apply to people who took the money before the fraud was revealed.
    - astrange 4y ago
      It’s hard to short something when you can’t trust the exchange. You shouldn’t short USDT either even though Tether is a fraud, because they can fraud harder and blow you up first. Just avoid the business, and don’t grow your nonprofits relying on him paying you.
      - 4y ago
diogenescynic 4y ago
What is EA?
- proamdev123 4y ago
  Effective Altruism
- braingenious 4y ago
  Effective Altruism. It’s a jumble of buzzwords used by insanely wealthy people to justify why they should have all of the money.
  - wmf 4y ago
    Isn't it about giving away money?
    - typon 4y ago
      It involves first having a bunch of money, then giving it away. The general trend is that most people fail to move past Step 1.
    - root_axis 4y ago
      Ostensibly. One critique is that it's a justification for accumulating wealth at all costs because purveyors of EA style themselves as uniquely capable of utilizing that money for good.
cr4nberry 4y ago
> crypto is generally bullshit, the leaders are mostly grifters and its good to see the tide finally revealing them for who they are. All the grifters who hopped on post 2020, yes But the actual implementation of a p2p electronic currency that cuts financial institutions out of the equation? This isn't bullshit, just math. There's a reason why the NYT is so hostile to crypto, and it isn't "the environment"

HPMOR 4y ago

I'm sorry but these two points are extremely disconnected. EA really has no bearing on the financial mechanisms that undid SBF. Furthermore, although he was a prime donor to EA, I don't think his involvement with it necessarily discredits them.

ryanobjc 4y ago
He’s one of EA highest profiles adherents. EA style thinking permeates SBF. This is the world EAs want - the one they’ve been advocating for a long time. It’s just in this iteration it failed. If the chance of success was higher than X% vs the risk of failing, it was all worth it. That’s the kind of morally bankrupt philosophy EA pushes.
moistly 4y ago
> EA really has no bearing on the financial mechanisms that undid SBF. It had bearing on the ethical/moral decisions he has been making. EA has allowed him to justify doing blatantly illegal acts.
- smk_ 4y ago
  It’s more likely he tried to cover up massive Alameda losses due to all the usual reasons people turn to illegal acts: shame, myopia, gambling addiction. One core EA principle is integrity. If he was actually “EA”, this wouldn’t have happened the way it did.
  - moistly 4y ago
    That’s no true Scotsman.
astrange 4y ago
Doesn’t discredit them but it does bankrupt them. What does discredit them is them claiming “we’re going to go on making charity effective and rational” as if everyone else who works at a nonprofit makes decisions with an Ouija board.
wmf 4y ago
There's a Twitter thread where SBF said he's willing to take unlimited risk, far beyond what is theoretically optimal, because it's for the good of humanity.
- ChainOfFools 4y ago
  easy to say when youre taking on that unlimited risk using other people's - err, humanity's - money. No wonder SBF went hard into the social capital accumulation game almost immediately, buying off politicians and grandiose charitywashing gestures. His window to establish a network of elite string pullers was short and closing fast.

habitue 4y ago

Uh, what? SBF being a fraud and a criminal doesn't indict EA in any way. He was also an avid wearer of t-shirts and unkempt hair, are those things are discredited now as well?

skinnymuch 4y ago
He didn’t wear that stuff as motivation for his money and power chasing. Nor did the tshirt and unkempt hair community galvanize around him and accept his purported billions.
astrange 4y ago
He was funding a lot of it and they didn’t seem to particularly care that he was obviously a fraud. Their earn to give position actually commands you to become such a fraud to give them money. Which they spend on castles (https://twitter.com/simpleteo/status/1591069362076590081 https://twitter.com/simpleteo/status/1591069362076590081) and pretending all other charity is “ineffective and selfish” because it doesn’t have “effective altruism” right in the name.
- habitue 4y ago
  I mean, was he *obviously* a fraud? You could easily short FTT if you thought that was the case. Additionally, any number of hedge funds could have, and it would have collapsed if they had (the reason this unravelled was a big sale of the token) Maybe you mean in hindsight he was obviously a fraud? But then that criticism doesn't apply to people who took the money before the fraud was revealed.
  - astrange 4y ago
    It’s hard to short something when you can’t trust the exchange. You shouldn’t short USDT either even though Tether is a fraud, because they can fraud harder and blow you up first. Just avoid the business, and don’t grow your nonprofits relying on him paying you.
    - 4y ago

diogenescynic 4y ago

What is EA?

proamdev123 4y ago
Effective Altruism
braingenious 4y ago
Effective Altruism. It’s a jumble of buzzwords used by insanely wealthy people to justify why they should have all of the money.
- wmf 4y ago
  Isn't it about giving away money?
  - typon 4y ago
    It involves first having a bunch of money, then giving it away. The general trend is that most people fail to move past Step 1.
  - root_axis 4y ago
    Ostensibly. One critique is that it's a justification for accumulating wealth at all costs because purveyors of EA style themselves as uniquely capable of utilizing that money for good.

cr4nberry 4y ago

> crypto is generally bullshit, the leaders are mostly grifters and its good to see the tide finally revealing them for who they are. All the grifters who hopped on post 2020, yes But the actual implementation of a p2p electronic currency that cuts financial institutions out of the equation? This isn't bullshit, just math. There's a reason why the NYT is so hostile to crypto, and it isn't "the environment"