5 ms·

The state is playing whack-a-mole on somebody who's allowed internet access. It's a losing proposition, he will always find another way to technically not brea

The state is playing whack-a-mole on somebody who's allowed internet access. It's a losing proposition, he will always find another way to technically not break the rules.

inasio 4y ago
There's also the possibility that the state doesn't really want to stop SBF from incriminating himself, he seems to have been doing a pretty good job so far.
anonkogudhyfhhf 4y ago
And his well connected family of high profile lawyers will get him out of any punishment https://mobile.twitter.com/unusual_whales/status/1625929943275417600 https://mobile.twitter.com/unusual_whales/status/16259299432...
- ceejayoz 4y ago
  We'll see. "His well connected family of high profile lawyers will get him out of any indictment" was a common opinion here leading up to his indictment.
- hnthrowaway0315 4y ago
  I think this is too big. Look who signed on that bail. Best case they made some deals under the table and let SBF eat all of the shit. Worst case SBF hang himself or something similar.
cmeacham98 4y ago
The problem is not that he's "breaking the rules" (technically or not), the problem is that the government is afraid SBF will use the VPN to cash out crypto he has through a no-KYC exchange and make a run for it. It's about bail - if you know somebody could easily obtain money without the government knowing (and is doing the thing that would enable them to do that), then they become much more of a flight risk (at least in the prosecution's eyes, and they hope the court agrees).
- notch898a 4y ago
  You're talking about the reason for the rules. I'm saying as long as he has internet access they will be playing whack-a-mole to make rules that achieve the very goal you express. I don't see any reasons why both our statements cannot exist without opposing each other. As an aside, I would squabble that breaking the rules, or not, is a relevant problem.
- mywittyname 4y ago
  Maybe he shouldn't be out on bail if he's so huge of a risk.
  - selectodude 4y ago
    I think most people would agree. Unfortunately the one person who matters is the judge and the 78 year old Lewis A. Kaplan does not seem to be swayed by that argument.
  - radicaldreamer 4y ago
    Obviously... bail was initially granted by a judge who's famous for being lenient to white collar criminals, until that judge stepped aside because her husband worked for a firm which did work for FTX...
- tombert 4y ago
  I think you're right, but I have to think that if this is something they're genuinely concerned about, then maybe he should, you know, not be given bail? IANAL, but isn't it pretty common for people who are flight risks to not be let out on bail?
- elif 4y ago
  No, mostly they are concerned about him communicating with other defendants and/or victims and/or paid fall guys and pre-orchestrating his trial. He wouldn't get very far if he tried to outsmart interpol.

The state is playing whack-a-mole on somebody who's allowed internet access. It's a losing proposition, he will always find another way to technically not break the rules.

inasio 4y ago

There's also the possibility that the state doesn't really want to stop SBF from incriminating himself, he seems to have been doing a pretty good job so far.

anonkogudhyfhhf 4y ago

And his well connected family of high profile lawyers will get him out of any punishment https://mobile.twitter.com/unusual_whales/status/1625929943275417600 https://mobile.twitter.com/unusual_whales/status/16259299432...

ceejayoz 4y ago
We'll see. "His well connected family of high profile lawyers will get him out of any indictment" was a common opinion here leading up to his indictment.
hnthrowaway0315 4y ago
I think this is too big. Look who signed on that bail. Best case they made some deals under the table and let SBF eat all of the shit. Worst case SBF hang himself or something similar.

cmeacham98 4y ago

The problem is not that he's "breaking the rules" (technically or not), the problem is that the government is afraid SBF will use the VPN to cash out crypto he has through a no-KYC exchange and make a run for it. It's about bail - if you know somebody could easily obtain money without the government knowing (and is doing the thing that would enable them to do that), then they become much more of a flight risk (at least in the prosecution's eyes, and they hope the court agrees).

notch898a 4y ago
You're talking about the reason for the rules. I'm saying as long as he has internet access they will be playing whack-a-mole to make rules that achieve the very goal you express. I don't see any reasons why both our statements cannot exist without opposing each other. As an aside, I would squabble that breaking the rules, or not, is a relevant problem.
mywittyname 4y ago
Maybe he shouldn't be out on bail if he's so huge of a risk.
- selectodude 4y ago
  I think most people would agree. Unfortunately the one person who matters is the judge and the 78 year old Lewis A. Kaplan does not seem to be swayed by that argument.
- radicaldreamer 4y ago
  Obviously... bail was initially granted by a judge who's famous for being lenient to white collar criminals, until that judge stepped aside because her husband worked for a firm which did work for FTX...
tombert 4y ago
I think you're right, but I have to think that if this is something they're genuinely concerned about, then maybe he should, you know, not be given bail? IANAL, but isn't it pretty common for people who are flight risks to not be let out on bail?
elif 4y ago
No, mostly they are concerned about him communicating with other defendants and/or victims and/or paid fall guys and pre-orchestrating his trial. He wouldn't get very far if he tried to outsmart interpol.