7 ms·

My bet would be Peter Thiel. He credits his fortune to SBF's father, was himself an investor in FTX, and has shown a willingness to fund litigation.

Mountain_Skies 4y ago
Most posts on HN label Thiel as a righwing nutbag. Why would he bail out someone who was so tightly aligned with causes opposite of his ideology?
- candiddevmike 4y ago
  Political distinctions for the rich are an illusion, they play both sides to their benefit. Never assume the rich are on your "team".
- anaganisk 4y ago
  Trump was once a Democrat. You become rich when you put profits above morals (most cases).
  - napoleond 4y ago
    Surely that’s not all it takes?
    - thedorkknight 4y ago
      A steady diet of watching nothing but fox news has a similar effect
- DonHopkins 4y ago
  Because SBF's alignment with those causes was purely performative.
- boeingUH60 4y ago
  Why are people so worked up on politics today that they assume you can’t help or work with someone of a different political ideology?
  - jeffwask 4y ago
    Because the divide went from "I believe in a balanced budget and you don't" to I believe you have no right to live or have bodily autonomy and I will do everything in my power to strip you of your rights. There are no sides anymore it's supporting racists, bigots and misogynists or not.
    - jeffwask 4y ago
      Or if you don't like that one we could try... Because between 2020 and 2022 the world experienced the greatest transfer of wealth between the poor and middle class to the wealthy as a result of the Coronavirus pandemic. Or if you don't like that one we could try... Because the wealth gap between classes is the greatest it has been since the days of the robber barons and individuals who cannot afford basic medical procedures have to hope an influencer wants clicks and will pay for their surgery so they won't be blind. Or if you don't like that one we could try... As the world burns from rampant climate change, one side actively blocks any effort to halt or god forbid repair the damage done while enriching corporations and the 1%. All while the 1% jet set around doing the equivalent damage of entire countries to the climate. In the mean time the youngest generation of Americans, by and large believe they will never be able to own a home or have children.
      - spookthesunset 4y ago
        > Because between 2020 and 2022 the world experienced the greatest transfer of wealth between the poor and middle class to the wealthy as a result of the Coronavirus pandemic. It wasn’t the virus or the pandemic that caused this. This was caused by societies insane reaction to it. Virtually all second order effects from the pandemic are caused by our reaction not by the virus.
    - tastyfreeze 4y ago
- Natsu 4y ago
  The interesting thing is that we can revisit these predictions in just a bit to see who was right and who was wrong.
- woodruffw 4y ago
  SBF's political donations are both more evenly distributed than previously reported[1], and seemed targeted more at pacifying potential investigations/regulatory attention than driven by ideological/political concerns. (And this framing makes intuitive sense: the politicians least likely to be cryptocurrency aligned lean center-left.) Edit: Pulling the relevant grafs out: > “All my Republican donations were dark,” he said, referring to political donations that are not publicly disclosed in FEC filings. “The reason was not for regulatory reasons, it’s because reporters freak the f—k out if you donate to Republicans. They’re all super liberal, and I didn’t want to have that fight.” > Given that he donated nearly $40 million to Democrats in the 2022 election cycle—and he admitted to giving an equal amount to Republicans—his total political contributions may have actually been around $80 million. [1]: https://time.com/6241262/sam-bankman-fried-political-donations/ https://time.com/6241262/sam-bankman-fried-political-donatio...
  - JumpCrisscross 4y ago
    > seemed targeted more at pacifying potential investigations/regulatory attention than driven by ideological/political concerns They were almost entirely about messaging to outside the political class.
  - ufmace 4y ago
    He's been caught constantly lying about everything over and over again, but we should definitely take his word that he's donated just as much to Republicans but there's no proof of it at all.
    - woodruffw 4y ago
      Again: it's not clear what strategic value this lie would have. Legal discovery will presumably provide a more final answer here.
  - psychlops 4y ago
    Surely we can trust what he says about his political donations. He's been so honest.
- Centigonal 4y ago
  Effective Altruism isn't very different from Randian objectivism.
murbard2 4y ago
Plus a tendency to make contrarian bets. Whoever is backing him is taking on the risk of SBF jumping bail (and I'd assume the house is under surveillance and he's wearing ankle monitors), in exchange for either silence or valuable goodwill on the tiny off-chance he gets out of this.

Mountain_Skies 4y ago

Most posts on HN label Thiel as a righwing nutbag. Why would he bail out someone who was so tightly aligned with causes opposite of his ideology?

candiddevmike 4y ago
Political distinctions for the rich are an illusion, they play both sides to their benefit. Never assume the rich are on your "team".
anaganisk 4y ago
Trump was once a Democrat. You become rich when you put profits above morals (most cases).
- napoleond 4y ago
  Surely that’s not all it takes?
  - thedorkknight 4y ago
    A steady diet of watching nothing but fox news has a similar effect
DonHopkins 4y ago
Because SBF's alignment with those causes was purely performative.
boeingUH60 4y ago
Why are people so worked up on politics today that they assume you can’t help or work with someone of a different political ideology?
- jeffwask 4y ago
  Because the divide went from "I believe in a balanced budget and you don't" to I believe you have no right to live or have bodily autonomy and I will do everything in my power to strip you of your rights. There are no sides anymore it's supporting racists, bigots and misogynists or not.
  - jeffwask 4y ago
    Or if you don't like that one we could try... Because between 2020 and 2022 the world experienced the greatest transfer of wealth between the poor and middle class to the wealthy as a result of the Coronavirus pandemic. Or if you don't like that one we could try... Because the wealth gap between classes is the greatest it has been since the days of the robber barons and individuals who cannot afford basic medical procedures have to hope an influencer wants clicks and will pay for their surgery so they won't be blind. Or if you don't like that one we could try... As the world burns from rampant climate change, one side actively blocks any effort to halt or god forbid repair the damage done while enriching corporations and the 1%. All while the 1% jet set around doing the equivalent damage of entire countries to the climate. In the mean time the youngest generation of Americans, by and large believe they will never be able to own a home or have children.
    - spookthesunset 4y ago
      > Because between 2020 and 2022 the world experienced the greatest transfer of wealth between the poor and middle class to the wealthy as a result of the Coronavirus pandemic. It wasn’t the virus or the pandemic that caused this. This was caused by societies insane reaction to it. Virtually all second order effects from the pandemic are caused by our reaction not by the virus.
  - tastyfreeze 4y ago
Natsu 4y ago
The interesting thing is that we can revisit these predictions in just a bit to see who was right and who was wrong.
woodruffw 4y ago
SBF's political donations are both more evenly distributed than previously reported[1], and seemed targeted more at pacifying potential investigations/regulatory attention than driven by ideological/political concerns. (And this framing makes intuitive sense: the politicians least likely to be cryptocurrency aligned lean center-left.) Edit: Pulling the relevant grafs out: > “All my Republican donations were dark,” he said, referring to political donations that are not publicly disclosed in FEC filings. “The reason was not for regulatory reasons, it’s because reporters freak the f—k out if you donate to Republicans. They’re all super liberal, and I didn’t want to have that fight.” > Given that he donated nearly $40 million to Democrats in the 2022 election cycle—and he admitted to giving an equal amount to Republicans—his total political contributions may have actually been around $80 million. [1]: https://time.com/6241262/sam-bankman-fried-political-donations/ https://time.com/6241262/sam-bankman-fried-political-donatio...
- JumpCrisscross 4y ago
  > seemed targeted more at pacifying potential investigations/regulatory attention than driven by ideological/political concerns They were almost entirely about messaging to outside the political class.
- ufmace 4y ago
  He's been caught constantly lying about everything over and over again, but we should definitely take his word that he's donated just as much to Republicans but there's no proof of it at all.
  - woodruffw 4y ago
    Again: it's not clear what strategic value this lie would have. Legal discovery will presumably provide a more final answer here.
- psychlops 4y ago
  Surely we can trust what he says about his political donations. He's been so honest.
Centigonal 4y ago
Effective Altruism isn't very different from Randian objectivism.

murbard2 4y ago

Plus a tendency to make contrarian bets. Whoever is backing him is taking on the risk of SBF jumping bail (and I'd assume the house is under surveillance and he's wearing ankle monitors), in exchange for either silence or valuable goodwill on the tiny off-chance he gets out of this.