4 ms·

SBF, his foundation and his family are well connected politically. NYT already did a bizarro puff piece on him, now Vox does this (which apparently directly rec

SBF, his foundation and his family are well connected politically. NYT already did a bizarro puff piece on him, now Vox does this (which apparently directly received FTX foundation money). It’s absurd as he is essentially a well connected criminal. edit I do want to correct one thing - this is not a puff piece like the NYT one, actually it implicates him.

vkou 4y ago
Having two professors as parents isn't exactly 'well connected politically'[1]. Two senators, or two billionaires would be. [1] I can't say I've ever felt that I was well-connected politically...
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- kgwgk 4y ago
  Did your father work with legislators to try to pass laws? “When I went to California to try to fight into it, I thought, ‘Well, there’s only 120 legislators. I’ll talk to them all one on one,'” Bankman said. “I found that in order to do it, I had to hire a lobbyist because I just couldn’t handle the details or get the meetings. In Congress, when I went there, now there’s 500 plus, and what I found everywhere I went is that Intuit had already preceded me. They’d already met every representative I was going to meet.” Did your mother create a political fundraising organization? “In 2018, the secretive Stanford-connected Democratic fundraising group Mind the Gap (MTG) funneled over $20 million toward competitive U.S. House of Representative elections and get-out-the-vote (GOTV) organizations. In 2020, MTG wants to increase that number to $140 million. “MTG is led by Barbara Fried, the William W. and Gertrude H. Saunders Professor of Law; Paul Brest, an emeritus professor of law and director of the Law and Policy Lab; and Graham Gottlieb, a Stanford research affiliate. Of the three, Gottlieb has the most direct policy experience, having formerly served in junior roles in former President Barack Obama’s 2012 reelection campaign and in Obama’s White House.”
  - HideousKojima 4y ago
    His aunt is also a member of the World Economic Forum
tsimionescu 4y ago
I wouldn't exactly call this a puff piece, unlike the NYT one.
guelo 4y ago
People obviously want to hear what he has to say. Are you saying that an ethical media would refuse to interview him? Why?
- kranke155 4y ago
  No not at all, this is completely unlike the bizarro NYT piece.
  - guelo 4y ago
    It's so weird to me how these ideas become widespread so quickly and accepted as fact. I read the NYT piece and it was fine, the interviewer mostly let SBF talk.
AlexandrB 4y ago
How is this a puff piece? Just posting these chat transcripts is damaging to his reputation and probably his chances in court. He does not come off looking good here.
- kranke155 4y ago
  His father is a lawyer so I’m confused about his behaviour. Does he think this will help him somehow, to appear like he’s terribly sorry about what happened ? Surely his behaviour is criminal?
  - oldgradstudent 4y ago
    His parents are law professors specializing in philosophy, economics, and business. He would have done better with a street smart criminal lawyer.
    - sph 4y ago
      Does Saul Goodman deal with crypto these days?
jmull 4y ago
This and the NYT interview are not puff pieces. They are handing SBF the rope to hang himself with, putting his confession on the record. Not sure what what the people pushing this narrative aren’t understanding. If they wanted to protect him they would refuse to interview him and try to convince him not to speak to anyone but counsel about this.
- kranke155 4y ago
  Maybe you’re right. Actually wrote this before reading the article (typical!) and the article is not friendly to him at all, weirdly he seems to confess his activity. This is super weird because my impression is his father is a lawyer, so is it possible he actually doesn’t think / knows he won’t be convicted of anything?
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- ninth_ant 4y ago
  > Not sure what what the people pushing this narrative aren’t understanding They are clouded by anger and frustration, I’d wager, many folks lost money in this fraud. Some maybe caught up in the mob mentality and excitement around taking SBF down. Anything short of absolute demonization is not good enough when you’re mad, I suppose.
  - kranke155 4y ago
    I didn't lose anything, maybe I had 10$ in dust on FTX. But yeah I'm pretty mad and I'm even more mad because I believe CZ/Binance are also a super shady time bomb.
- FireBeyond 4y ago
  > Not sure what what the people pushing this narrative aren’t understanding. From the other day, it seems, they're angry that the NYT isn't saying, in exact words, "SBF is a massive criminal who committed massive fraud". And when you respond and say "That's because their lawyers understand the concept of defamation", they say "well, then they just need to talk to people and have them say it so everyone knows he's a criminal and committed fraud".
Quinner 4y ago
I'm not sure how you'd read this as a puff piece. The reporter described his reaction to the interview as "appalled".
- kranke155 4y ago
  I’ve edited to clarify. I actually posted before I read the article (typical!).
  - yodon 4y ago
    >I actually posted before I read the article (typical!) I'm not sure whether you're saying "I did something bad, repeatedly, but it's ok because I'm admitting it" (while arguing someone else who did something bad shouldn't be let off the hook for admitting they did something bad), or whether instead you're taking pride in routinely acting in a way that subtracts value from the community (while arguing someone else who acted in ways detrimental to the community should receive harsher judgements than you feel he's received). Either reading suggests an opportunity for productive self reflection. Posting criticisms of articles you haven't read isn't the scale of damage that SBF caused, but the belief that "I'm not intending to cause harm so the harm I'm causing isn't real" appears to be at the root of both sets of outcomes. The impact of SBF's actions was higher simply because one day he found himself holding a larger lever than most of us have the occasion to hold. It's good to be in practice, should that day come.
    - kranke155 4y ago
      That's an interesting perspective and I certainly agree with it.

vkou 4y ago

Having two professors as parents isn't exactly 'well connected politically'[1]. Two senators, or two billionaires would be. [1] I can't say I've ever felt that I was well-connected politically...

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
kgwgk 4y ago
Did your father work with legislators to try to pass laws? “When I went to California to try to fight into it, I thought, ‘Well, there’s only 120 legislators. I’ll talk to them all one on one,'” Bankman said. “I found that in order to do it, I had to hire a lobbyist because I just couldn’t handle the details or get the meetings. In Congress, when I went there, now there’s 500 plus, and what I found everywhere I went is that Intuit had already preceded me. They’d already met every representative I was going to meet.” Did your mother create a political fundraising organization? “In 2018, the secretive Stanford-connected Democratic fundraising group Mind the Gap (MTG) funneled over $20 million toward competitive U.S. House of Representative elections and get-out-the-vote (GOTV) organizations. In 2020, MTG wants to increase that number to $140 million. “MTG is led by Barbara Fried, the William W. and Gertrude H. Saunders Professor of Law; Paul Brest, an emeritus professor of law and director of the Law and Policy Lab; and Graham Gottlieb, a Stanford research affiliate. Of the three, Gottlieb has the most direct policy experience, having formerly served in junior roles in former President Barack Obama’s 2012 reelection campaign and in Obama’s White House.”
- HideousKojima 4y ago
  His aunt is also a member of the World Economic Forum

tsimionescu 4y ago

I wouldn't exactly call this a puff piece, unlike the NYT one.

guelo 4y ago

People obviously want to hear what he has to say. Are you saying that an ethical media would refuse to interview him? Why?

kranke155 4y ago
No not at all, this is completely unlike the bizarro NYT piece.
- guelo 4y ago
  It's so weird to me how these ideas become widespread so quickly and accepted as fact. I read the NYT piece and it was fine, the interviewer mostly let SBF talk.

AlexandrB 4y ago

How is this a puff piece? Just posting these chat transcripts is damaging to his reputation and probably his chances in court. He does not come off looking good here.

kranke155 4y ago
His father is a lawyer so I’m confused about his behaviour. Does he think this will help him somehow, to appear like he’s terribly sorry about what happened ? Surely his behaviour is criminal?
- oldgradstudent 4y ago
  His parents are law professors specializing in philosophy, economics, and business. He would have done better with a street smart criminal lawyer.
  - sph 4y ago
    Does Saul Goodman deal with crypto these days?

jmull 4y ago

This and the NYT interview are not puff pieces. They are handing SBF the rope to hang himself with, putting his confession on the record. Not sure what what the people pushing this narrative aren’t understanding. If they wanted to protect him they would refuse to interview him and try to convince him not to speak to anyone but counsel about this.

kranke155 4y ago
Maybe you’re right. Actually wrote this before reading the article (typical!) and the article is not friendly to him at all, weirdly he seems to confess his activity. This is super weird because my impression is his father is a lawyer, so is it possible he actually doesn’t think / knows he won’t be convicted of anything?
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
ninth_ant 4y ago
> Not sure what what the people pushing this narrative aren’t understanding They are clouded by anger and frustration, I’d wager, many folks lost money in this fraud. Some maybe caught up in the mob mentality and excitement around taking SBF down. Anything short of absolute demonization is not good enough when you’re mad, I suppose.
- kranke155 4y ago
  I didn't lose anything, maybe I had 10$ in dust on FTX. But yeah I'm pretty mad and I'm even more mad because I believe CZ/Binance are also a super shady time bomb.
FireBeyond 4y ago
> Not sure what what the people pushing this narrative aren’t understanding. From the other day, it seems, they're angry that the NYT isn't saying, in exact words, "SBF is a massive criminal who committed massive fraud". And when you respond and say "That's because their lawyers understand the concept of defamation", they say "well, then they just need to talk to people and have them say it so everyone knows he's a criminal and committed fraud".

Quinner 4y ago

I'm not sure how you'd read this as a puff piece. The reporter described his reaction to the interview as "appalled".

kranke155 4y ago
I’ve edited to clarify. I actually posted before I read the article (typical!).
- yodon 4y ago
  >I actually posted before I read the article (typical!) I'm not sure whether you're saying "I did something bad, repeatedly, but it's ok because I'm admitting it" (while arguing someone else who did something bad shouldn't be let off the hook for admitting they did something bad), or whether instead you're taking pride in routinely acting in a way that subtracts value from the community (while arguing someone else who acted in ways detrimental to the community should receive harsher judgements than you feel he's received). Either reading suggests an opportunity for productive self reflection. Posting criticisms of articles you haven't read isn't the scale of damage that SBF caused, but the belief that "I'm not intending to cause harm so the harm I'm causing isn't real" appears to be at the root of both sets of outcomes. The impact of SBF's actions was higher simply because one day he found himself holding a larger lever than most of us have the occasion to hold. It's good to be in practice, should that day come.
  - kranke155 4y ago
    That's an interesting perspective and I certainly agree with it.