6 ms·

What I don't understand is why the New York Times is saying that the guy who created and ran this scheme is a great guy. They wrote an extremely flattering arti

by Dig1t 4y ago

What I don't understand is why the New York Times is saying that the guy who created and ran this scheme is a great guy. They wrote an extremely flattering article about him and are even hosting an event where he's a prestigious speaker. He seems like a grifter and responsible for presiding over the loss of a boatload of money for investors. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/14/technology/ftx-sam-bankman-fried-crypto-bankruptcy.html https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/14/technology/ftx-sam-bankma... https://www.nytimes.com/events/dealbook-summit#speakers https://www.nytimes.com/events/dealbook-summit#speakers

polygamous_bat 4y ago
I know for example SEC has, in the past, used a crypto summit in New York to serve a subpoena to another crypto grifter. [0] I would not be surprised if there is government pressure on NYT to pretend everything is fine to lure Sam Bankman-Fried out of his safe haven in the Bahamas. [0] https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2021/09/crypto-conference-jolted-by-rumor-of-sec-serving-subpoena.html https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2021/09/crypto-conference-jo...
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
aksss 4y ago
Wasn't he like the second largest democrat donor in the US this year? $39.7 million to federal races. The soft-glove treatment from the NYT is the least he could expect. Maybe he knew what was coming. https://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/meetthepressblog/sam-bankman-frieds-downfall-deprives-dems-key-donor-rcna57091 https://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/meetthepressblog/sam-...
- ceejayoz 4y ago
  Both co-CEOs of FTX were large donors, one to each party. Neat trick. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-11-08/ftx-crypto-bros-clashing-politics-meet-cz-chaos-on-election-day https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-11-08/ftx-crypt... > Bankman-Fried, known as SBF, threw more money at Democrats this cycle than anyone but George Soros, according to OpenSecrets data. One of his top lieutenants, Ryan Salame, has been bankrolling Republicans at almost the same pace as Steve Schwarzman and Peter Thiel. There's a good chart of how the company distributed things at https://www.ft.com/content/428c7800-c72d-4c59-9940-4376fea6e263 https://www.ft.com/content/428c7800-c72d-4c59-9940-4376fea6e... None of those politicians are gonna stay bought; no more money is coming. There's no reason to think FTX can exert further lobbying pressure; they're cooked.
- SV_BubbleTime 4y ago
  Not sure why this was downvoted. Yes, he donated 2/3 to Dems and 1/3 to Republicans. Assumption is for protection, and regulatory direction. He was only behind Soros in terms of total dollars to Dems. His mother started a couple of Dem PACs just 13 days before her son became CEO of FTX (imagine the coincidence!). Her money, as far as it is traceable is also very significant. ... This was I suppose part of his "effective altruism" (if you can say that with a straight face). Instead of downvotes, imagine the comments and rage if he had donated to Trump instead.
  - ceejayoz 4y ago
    > Instead of downvotes, imagine the comments and rage if he had donated to Trump instead. That's what his co-CEO was for; he played the same role with Republicans. $15M to a PAC he controlled (https://www.fec.gov/data/receipts/?committee_id=C00809020&two_year_transaction_period=2022&cycle=2022&line_number=F3X-17&data_type=processed https://www.fec.gov/data/receipts/?committee_id=C00809020&tw...) that donated exclusively to Republican campaigns.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
    - SV_BubbleTime 4y ago
      Yes. Thank you. That is the 1/3 (but actually less since his mother’s the PAC money for Dems and Biden directly is not counted) that I mentioned. This is also the company that had a round 7 million on their excel sheet for a fund called TRUMPLOSE. All I’m asking is for your honesty that some people who are looking the other way on this would be appalled. If you aren’t saying that some people would be associating Trump himself to these fraud-derived donations, you just aren’t being honest.
      - ceejayoz 4y ago
        > This is also the company that had a round 7 million on their excel sheet for a fund called TRUMPLOSE. https://www.coindesk.com/markets/2022/11/15/analysis-ftxs-trumplose-token-isnt-proof-of-an-ftx-democrat-ukraine-conspiracy/ https://www.coindesk.com/markets/2022/11/15/analysis-ftxs-tr... "For those looking for a shadowy tale that involves crypto in the halls of power in D.C., TRUMPLOSE is going to disappoint. It’s not a new world order talisman that shows FTX and Sam Bankman-Fried are complicit in laundering money to the Democratic party through Ukraine donations. Rather, it’s one part of FTX’s prediction market it ran during the 2020 U.S. election."
graeme 4y ago
The NYT often has an editorial bent which makes them write flatly false articles. It's been rather odd, and a clear point of divergence from other US newspapers. For example, the NYT was very pro the Iraq USD argument More recently, they kept going on about Clinton's emails, while ignoring much larger security breaches from Trump's side More recently than that, they kept saying coronavirus reinfections would be impossible They also have been producing an endless string of anti-tech articles, but pro-crypto articles In each case they had some clear editorial directive: "Bush good", "Clinton emails bad", "Coronavirus immunity persists (whether natural or vax)" "tech bad" "SBF good, crypto exciting" You might agree or disagree with these positions and so that effects your reading of what I'm writing. But the point is they had an inflexible position on these issues. By contrast, a paper like the FT or the WSJ or the Washington Post generally tends not to have a monolithic party line on the points above, and would reports points on the issues above with nuance, mentioning evidence in favour or against the positions as it came out. NYT does have some great articles but they're utterly unreliable if you don't have enough background knowledge of an issue to parse their party line.
- m348e912 4y ago
  I'm not going ask you to back up your assertions but that really hasn't been my impression of NYT's editorial positions.
  - pphysch 4y ago
    Edward Bernays, pioneer of PR, wrote about how half of NYT's frontpage articles were literal propaganda. In 1928. I think we would be naive to assume anything has improved in the past century.
    - 2OEH8eoCRo0 4y ago
      > I think we would be naive to assume anything has improved in the past century. What a naive assumption.
      - 4y ago
TurkishPoptart 4y ago
- kspacewalk2 4y ago
  >But somehow he has the time to fly to NYC and brush shoulders with SBF, Larry Fink, and the treasury secretary. Zoom. >Makes you wonder why anyone these days remotely critical of the motives of billionaries and global "changemakers" is branded a conspiracy theorist. That's only true in their own minds.
- ceejayoz 4y ago
  > It was my understanding that Mr. Zelenskyy is busy defending his country in a war. But somehow he has the time to fly to NYC and brush shoulders with SBF, Larry Fink, and the treasury secretary. Are you under the impression he's expected to be out there literally driving a tank? Flying around the world meeting with government officials and political influencers is precisely what you'd expect someone to do in this scenario. He'll have some staff and a phone on him.
  - blaser-waffle 4y ago
    Arguably, that's Zelensky's main strength: he's a comedian and did tours; he's a showman, a diplomat, a talker. His primary role viz-a-viz the war is going around talking, doing meetings, and drumming up support. Get him on a 12 city tour, except instead of cross-dressing and telling jokes he's cutting deals for aid. He's no general, and it's likely he doesn't know jack about actually fighting a war. Nor does he need to: he's got actual generals for that, ones who have been fighting w/ the Russians on and off since 2014, on top of real-time intelligence and assistance from the 30 -- say it again, THIRTY -- countries of NATO.
jcampbell1 4y ago
At this point the story is ongoing, entertaining and the victims are mainly cryptobros. SBF is talking and helping sell newspapers. While I am more empathetic to the victims, I understand the NYTimes strategy here, especially considering he is still talking and saying strange things that he is unaware make him look like a sociopath. Edit: His own psychiatrist is giving interviews with the times. This story is so juicy. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/15/technology/ftx-sam-bankman-fried-psychiatrist.html https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/15/technology/ftx-sam-bankma...
hotpotamus 4y ago
What if it wasn't a scam? What if he had actually innovated some way to monetize crypto? Wouldn't that be impressive; the next Gates or Jobs or the like? He certainly seemed aware of how to press those buttons. Perhaps the NYTimes was as caught up in crypto nonsense as anyone else; they saw it as technological magic that they didn't understand, but identified Bankman-Fried as a wizard who did understand that magic and had harnessed it.
- Dig1t 4y ago
  >Perhaps the NYTimes was as caught up in crypto nonsense as anyone else The article about his was written AFTER he lost all his investors' money (a few days ago). The prestigious conference where he is speaking is happening in 13 days from now. Everyone knows this guy was a grifter, he created and ran an exchange from the Bahamas, he didn't invent the iPhone of crypto or something. I see 0 evidence of any Steve Jobs level innovation.
  - hotpotamus 4y ago
    If everyone knows he was a grifter, then why did people give him money?
    - ceejayoz 4y ago
      People put money in PonziCoin. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16225383 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16225383 Everyone knows he's a grifter now. Some probably suspected earlier. Some of those probably invested anyways on the idea that they could get out before the collapse.
    - hnaccy 4y ago
      they're talking about now not before FTX collapsed nobody is giving him money these days
- themihai 4y ago
  The "investors" didn't invest in technological magic. They just wanted to double their coins. Just ask any crypto investor what was supposed to be the end product out of his investment. Lotteries are a tax on stupidity and the whole crypto mania is just a big lottery run by various individuals!
2OEH8eoCRo0 4y ago
Where do they say he's a great guy? The article is quite factual, citing his words and actions and providing context without injecting much in terms of emotion. He also hasn't been charged with any crimes yet.
- jcampbell1 4y ago
  I don’t see a real issue with the article, but it is worth pointing out the article completely ignores the many victims of SBF. If I were a victim of SBF, the article would be a bit insulting.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
- ViViDboarder 4y ago
  Yea, I don’t find it flattering at all. In fact, it lays out a bunch of pretty ugly details about the arrangement with Alameda.
brindlejim 4y ago
This seems like an ideologically driven comment, since the NYT is reporting on the FTX bankruptcy in a v clear way: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/17/business/ftx-bankruptcy.html https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/17/business/ftx-bankruptcy.h...
- Dig1t 4y ago
  I don't have any ideology driving my opinion, or at least I don't think so, I read these pages by the NYT and was surprised that he is being treated so nicely given what happened and compared to similar situations historically. I mean, in the speakers panel he is listed along side Mark Zuckerberg, Volodymyr Zelensky, Janet Yellen, etc. Comparing what he did with what he others in the speakers panel have done I get some cognitive dissonance.
  - brindlejim 4y ago
    OK. There have been about a dozen pieces written about FTX on the NYT in just the last few days. Most have not been soft balls like the interview-based piece. I apologize for accusing you of being driven by ideology. I didn't understand why you would choose those two links when the coverage is much broader and more critical: https://www.nytimes.com/search?query=FTX https://www.nytimes.com/search?query=FTX
themihai 4y ago
What exactly did the investors invest in?
brindlejim 4y ago
They arranged those speakers long before the collapse. I doubt he'll voluntarily set foot in the US until he figures out whether or not he'll be immediately sent to jail.
SkyMarshal 4y ago
They're not actually. That story broke one of the most damning pieces of information in the whole ordeal, and just casually snuck it in without further commentary. The whole thing was a hit piece disguised as a puff piece. https://twitter.com/WClementeIII/status/1592289824542949376 https://twitter.com/WClementeIII/status/1592289824542949376
Ferret7446 4y ago
Many people would not consider NYT a high quality news source, starting from many years ago. In any case, I would suggest to never trust any news source nowadays and always supplement with your own research.

by Dig1t 4y ago

polygamous_bat 4y ago

I know for example SEC has, in the past, used a crypto summit in New York to serve a subpoena to another crypto grifter. [0] I would not be surprised if there is government pressure on NYT to pretend everything is fine to lure Sam Bankman-Fried out of his safe haven in the Bahamas. [0] https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2021/09/crypto-conference-jolted-by-rumor-of-sec-serving-subpoena.html https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2021/09/crypto-conference-jo...

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

aksss 4y ago

Wasn't he like the second largest democrat donor in the US this year? $39.7 million to federal races. The soft-glove treatment from the NYT is the least he could expect. Maybe he knew what was coming. https://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/meetthepressblog/sam-bankman-frieds-downfall-deprives-dems-key-donor-rcna57091 https://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/meetthepressblog/sam-...

ceejayoz 4y ago
Both co-CEOs of FTX were large donors, one to each party. Neat trick. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-11-08/ftx-crypto-bros-clashing-politics-meet-cz-chaos-on-election-day https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-11-08/ftx-crypt... > Bankman-Fried, known as SBF, threw more money at Democrats this cycle than anyone but George Soros, according to OpenSecrets data. One of his top lieutenants, Ryan Salame, has been bankrolling Republicans at almost the same pace as Steve Schwarzman and Peter Thiel. There's a good chart of how the company distributed things at https://www.ft.com/content/428c7800-c72d-4c59-9940-4376fea6e263 https://www.ft.com/content/428c7800-c72d-4c59-9940-4376fea6e... None of those politicians are gonna stay bought; no more money is coming. There's no reason to think FTX can exert further lobbying pressure; they're cooked.
SV_BubbleTime 4y ago
Not sure why this was downvoted. Yes, he donated 2/3 to Dems and 1/3 to Republicans. Assumption is for protection, and regulatory direction. He was only behind Soros in terms of total dollars to Dems. His mother started a couple of Dem PACs just 13 days before her son became CEO of FTX (imagine the coincidence!). Her money, as far as it is traceable is also very significant. ... This was I suppose part of his "effective altruism" (if you can say that with a straight face). Instead of downvotes, imagine the comments and rage if he had donated to Trump instead.
- ceejayoz 4y ago
  > Instead of downvotes, imagine the comments and rage if he had donated to Trump instead. That's what his co-CEO was for; he played the same role with Republicans. $15M to a PAC he controlled (https://www.fec.gov/data/receipts/?committee_id=C00809020&two_year_transaction_period=2022&cycle=2022&line_number=F3X-17&data_type=processed https://www.fec.gov/data/receipts/?committee_id=C00809020&tw...) that donated exclusively to Republican campaigns.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - SV_BubbleTime 4y ago
    Yes. Thank you. That is the 1/3 (but actually less since his mother’s the PAC money for Dems and Biden directly is not counted) that I mentioned. This is also the company that had a round 7 million on their excel sheet for a fund called TRUMPLOSE. All I’m asking is for your honesty that some people who are looking the other way on this would be appalled. If you aren’t saying that some people would be associating Trump himself to these fraud-derived donations, you just aren’t being honest.
    - ceejayoz 4y ago
      > This is also the company that had a round 7 million on their excel sheet for a fund called TRUMPLOSE. https://www.coindesk.com/markets/2022/11/15/analysis-ftxs-trumplose-token-isnt-proof-of-an-ftx-democrat-ukraine-conspiracy/ https://www.coindesk.com/markets/2022/11/15/analysis-ftxs-tr... "For those looking for a shadowy tale that involves crypto in the halls of power in D.C., TRUMPLOSE is going to disappoint. It’s not a new world order talisman that shows FTX and Sam Bankman-Fried are complicit in laundering money to the Democratic party through Ukraine donations. Rather, it’s one part of FTX’s prediction market it ran during the 2020 U.S. election."

graeme 4y ago

The NYT often has an editorial bent which makes them write flatly false articles. It's been rather odd, and a clear point of divergence from other US newspapers. For example, the NYT was very pro the Iraq USD argument More recently, they kept going on about Clinton's emails, while ignoring much larger security breaches from Trump's side More recently than that, they kept saying coronavirus reinfections would be impossible They also have been producing an endless string of anti-tech articles, but pro-crypto articles In each case they had some clear editorial directive: "Bush good", "Clinton emails bad", "Coronavirus immunity persists (whether natural or vax)" "tech bad" "SBF good, crypto exciting" You might agree or disagree with these positions and so that effects your reading of what I'm writing. But the point is they had an inflexible position on these issues. By contrast, a paper like the FT or the WSJ or the Washington Post generally tends not to have a monolithic party line on the points above, and would reports points on the issues above with nuance, mentioning evidence in favour or against the positions as it came out. NYT does have some great articles but they're utterly unreliable if you don't have enough background knowledge of an issue to parse their party line.

m348e912 4y ago
I'm not going ask you to back up your assertions but that really hasn't been my impression of NYT's editorial positions.
- pphysch 4y ago
  Edward Bernays, pioneer of PR, wrote about how half of NYT's frontpage articles were literal propaganda. In 1928. I think we would be naive to assume anything has improved in the past century.
  - 2OEH8eoCRo0 4y ago
    > I think we would be naive to assume anything has improved in the past century. What a naive assumption.
    - 4y ago

TurkishPoptart 4y ago

kspacewalk2 4y ago
>But somehow he has the time to fly to NYC and brush shoulders with SBF, Larry Fink, and the treasury secretary. Zoom. >Makes you wonder why anyone these days remotely critical of the motives of billionaries and global "changemakers" is branded a conspiracy theorist. That's only true in their own minds.
ceejayoz 4y ago
> It was my understanding that Mr. Zelenskyy is busy defending his country in a war. But somehow he has the time to fly to NYC and brush shoulders with SBF, Larry Fink, and the treasury secretary. Are you under the impression he's expected to be out there literally driving a tank? Flying around the world meeting with government officials and political influencers is precisely what you'd expect someone to do in this scenario. He'll have some staff and a phone on him.
- blaser-waffle 4y ago
  Arguably, that's Zelensky's main strength: he's a comedian and did tours; he's a showman, a diplomat, a talker. His primary role viz-a-viz the war is going around talking, doing meetings, and drumming up support. Get him on a 12 city tour, except instead of cross-dressing and telling jokes he's cutting deals for aid. He's no general, and it's likely he doesn't know jack about actually fighting a war. Nor does he need to: he's got actual generals for that, ones who have been fighting w/ the Russians on and off since 2014, on top of real-time intelligence and assistance from the 30 -- say it again, THIRTY -- countries of NATO.

jcampbell1 4y ago

At this point the story is ongoing, entertaining and the victims are mainly cryptobros. SBF is talking and helping sell newspapers. While I am more empathetic to the victims, I understand the NYTimes strategy here, especially considering he is still talking and saying strange things that he is unaware make him look like a sociopath. Edit: His own psychiatrist is giving interviews with the times. This story is so juicy. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/15/technology/ftx-sam-bankman-fried-psychiatrist.html https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/15/technology/ftx-sam-bankma...

hotpotamus 4y ago

What if it wasn't a scam? What if he had actually innovated some way to monetize crypto? Wouldn't that be impressive; the next Gates or Jobs or the like? He certainly seemed aware of how to press those buttons. Perhaps the NYTimes was as caught up in crypto nonsense as anyone else; they saw it as technological magic that they didn't understand, but identified Bankman-Fried as a wizard who did understand that magic and had harnessed it.

Dig1t 4y ago
>Perhaps the NYTimes was as caught up in crypto nonsense as anyone else The article about his was written AFTER he lost all his investors' money (a few days ago). The prestigious conference where he is speaking is happening in 13 days from now. Everyone knows this guy was a grifter, he created and ran an exchange from the Bahamas, he didn't invent the iPhone of crypto or something. I see 0 evidence of any Steve Jobs level innovation.
- hotpotamus 4y ago
  If everyone knows he was a grifter, then why did people give him money?
  - ceejayoz 4y ago
    People put money in PonziCoin. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16225383 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16225383 Everyone knows he's a grifter now. Some probably suspected earlier. Some of those probably invested anyways on the idea that they could get out before the collapse.
  - hnaccy 4y ago
    they're talking about now not before FTX collapsed nobody is giving him money these days
themihai 4y ago
The "investors" didn't invest in technological magic. They just wanted to double their coins. Just ask any crypto investor what was supposed to be the end product out of his investment. Lotteries are a tax on stupidity and the whole crypto mania is just a big lottery run by various individuals!

2OEH8eoCRo0 4y ago

Where do they say he's a great guy? The article is quite factual, citing his words and actions and providing context without injecting much in terms of emotion. He also hasn't been charged with any crimes yet.

jcampbell1 4y ago
I don’t see a real issue with the article, but it is worth pointing out the article completely ignores the many victims of SBF. If I were a victim of SBF, the article would be a bit insulting.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
ViViDboarder 4y ago
Yea, I don’t find it flattering at all. In fact, it lays out a bunch of pretty ugly details about the arrangement with Alameda.

brindlejim 4y ago

This seems like an ideologically driven comment, since the NYT is reporting on the FTX bankruptcy in a v clear way: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/17/business/ftx-bankruptcy.html https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/17/business/ftx-bankruptcy.h...

Dig1t 4y ago
I don't have any ideology driving my opinion, or at least I don't think so, I read these pages by the NYT and was surprised that he is being treated so nicely given what happened and compared to similar situations historically. I mean, in the speakers panel he is listed along side Mark Zuckerberg, Volodymyr Zelensky, Janet Yellen, etc. Comparing what he did with what he others in the speakers panel have done I get some cognitive dissonance.
- brindlejim 4y ago
  OK. There have been about a dozen pieces written about FTX on the NYT in just the last few days. Most have not been soft balls like the interview-based piece. I apologize for accusing you of being driven by ideology. I didn't understand why you would choose those two links when the coverage is much broader and more critical: https://www.nytimes.com/search?query=FTX https://www.nytimes.com/search?query=FTX

themihai 4y ago

What exactly did the investors invest in?

brindlejim 4y ago

They arranged those speakers long before the collapse. I doubt he'll voluntarily set foot in the US until he figures out whether or not he'll be immediately sent to jail.

SkyMarshal 4y ago

They're not actually. That story broke one of the most damning pieces of information in the whole ordeal, and just casually snuck it in without further commentary. The whole thing was a hit piece disguised as a puff piece. https://twitter.com/WClementeIII/status/1592289824542949376 https://twitter.com/WClementeIII/status/1592289824542949376

Ferret7446 4y ago

Many people would not consider NYT a high quality news source, starting from many years ago. In any case, I would suggest to never trust any news source nowadays and always supplement with your own research.