3 ms·
The next bit of that exchange is: "each individual decision seemed fine and I didn't realize how big their sum was until the end". That's a classic "ends justi
by ZephyrBlu 4y ago
The next bit of that exchange is: "each individual decision seemed fine and I didn't realize how big their sum was until the end".
That's a classic "ends justify the means" slippery slope.
And even if he didn't want or mean to, he was more than happy to engage in that kind of behaviour if needed.
Someone like that is absolutely a terrible person in my book. I would not trust or be friends with someone who has that attitude. He is more concerned with "winning" than behaving ethically.
Imagine if you were an FTX employee, customer or investor who was in the dark. Would you really just chalk this up to playing "a little too fast and loose with an explosively growing business"? Would you be happy to work with SBF again? I know I wouldn't.
- molsongolden 4y ago"each individual decision seemed fine and I didn't realize how big their sum was until the end" This reads to me as "I was viewing all these situations in isolation instead of looking at the full system" not your reading which seems to be more "I thought I could get away with each individual thing". To your last point, Parker Conrad was dragged through the mud and shunned everywhere when Zenefits imploded but he came right back with Rippling and is a tech darling now.
- ZephyrBlu 4y agoThey are effectively the same reading to me. He's the CEO. It's his job to understand the whole system. Whether he looked at things in isolation, or thought he could get away with each one he was still reckless. From a quick reading of what happened with Zenefits (Was not keeping track of tech back then), it seems bad but not as bad as FTX. I'm also not saying that everyone would not want to work with someone like that again. I'm sure some (Most?) people would, but for me it would take lot to convince me they're not going to repeat that behaviour.