5 ms·

Elizabeth Holmes, left to her own devices

9 points by Maro 3y ago

bagacrap 3y ago
Guess this is the first time the reporter has encountered someone with antisocial personality disorder.
- jstarfish 3y ago
  > “Elizabeth is a very, very charismatic person. When she speaks to you, she makes you feel like you are the most important person in her world in that moment. She almost has this reality distortion field around her that people can just get sucked into.” > “I still dream about being able to contribute in that space,” Holmes tells her. “I still feel the same calling to it as I always did and I still think the need is there.” > “I was admittedly swept up in Liz as an authentic and sympathetic person. She’s gentle and charismatic, in a quiet way. My editor laughed at me when I shared these impressions, telling me (and I quote), ‘Amy Chozick, you got rolled!'” Characteristics of Narcissistic personality disorder, not APD. I actually believe that she's genuine in her intentions-- she's just completely fucking clueless and surrounded by enablers (self-selected, of course-- never challenge these people or you'll get cut out of their next big thing). Her "success" feeds her own grandiosity so she reaches for more. It's like watching a child star trying to adapt to aging out of what made them famous in the first place. Prisons are full of APDs. They don't bother with pageantry, they just knife you in the gut, steal your shit, leave you for dead, and never think about you again.
  - bagacrap 3y ago
    I think she is probably both. Anyway, Mrs. Holmes will herself be imprisoned soon, so I guess she'll be the odd one out if her diagnosis is just NPD.
daniel-cussen 3y ago
[dead]
incahoots 3y ago
I was pretty dismayed how NYT framed her as this "life turnaround, devoted mother" facade when in reality she put lives in danger by promising a fancy scam. I generally don't care about the investors she duped, they should've performed their due diligence and they didn't. What Theranos proved is that 'investors' will back your company if you wear a fancy turtleneck, and speak to prospects like Jobs did. Ridiculous all around, the real victims got nothing. Just another reminder that the law only works for those who can afford it.
- brianwawok 3y ago
  To me the NYT piece read as “lol here’s the current scam of Holmes”. I guess my lens is rather harsh though :)
  - incahoots 3y ago
    I think we can both agree she's utilizing the oldest scam known to man. I recently heard someone coin her as the 'tyler durden girlboss', gave me a chuckle.
pessimizer 3y ago
These people keep projecting their own attraction to certain people onto those people. She's not magical, you just love being in the presence of rich, pretty, young white ladies. Your desire is not one of her qualities (or her fault, really.) The most astounding thing about Theranos was how little work it took to pull the fraud, and how chintzy it was around the edges. If you had been born where she was, looked like she looked, and had powerful older men constantly blowing smoke up your ass and declaring you a wunderkind, it would be hard to resist scamming them. The army of fawning reporters (and ex-generals and other officials) are the real problem. You're not giving us a peek behind Holmes's curtain, you were Holmes's curtain.
- throwawaymaths 3y ago
  Great point, but: > it would be hard to resist scamming them I don't think she even scammed them. She really believes she can do all the things. Her fraud was not a scam, it was just covering failures and fake it till you make it without discernment or introspection (doing it in a field where you really need to stop faking it sooner)
  - logdap 3y ago
    > just covering failures and fake it till you make it without discernment or introspection (doing it in a field where you really need to stop faking it sooner) In a word: scamming. Even her voice is fake.
  - stcroixx 3y ago
    Guess we'll have to keep sending people to prison until y'all get that your 'fake it till you make it' is in fact fraud, which most people understand as a kind of scam.
    - throwawaymaths 3y ago
      It's not fraud if you tell your investors (and when you have customers, your customers) how you're faking it. "fake it till you make it" generally means "your product is egregiously incomplete for X reason(s)" and in many cases, the investors know this and willing to take the risk. It's on the investors to do due diligence and assess whether or not the risk is up to their level of appetite. I do believe that holmes was doing this for the much of her run with Theranos. That is normal startup behavior, and not really unethical, and certainly not illegal, though it can be spectacularly misguided, as we saw. At the point where she started hiding what she was doing, it became "fake it till you make it" that is ALSO fraud. So no. For chrissakes, Don't generally send people who "fake it till they make it" to prison.
seanhunter 3y ago
It's really astonishing that she seems to be getting away with it (again). I sincerely hope that's not the case.
- dan-rocks 3y ago
  How is she getting away with it? She will serve 11 years in federal prison for her crimes.
  - lesuorac 3y ago
    I mean if she can keep delaying her sentence she won't be serving 11 years ... Ask yourself, if I did what she did would I be in prison right now or maybe in the future?
    - olliej 3y ago
      Of course not, because that would also mean you had been scammed millions you could spend on lawyers to defend yourself :D Better question: if you went around shoplifting stores for a week, were arrested, got bail, and then were caught buying a one way ticket to a non-extradition country would you still be out on bail? even before being found guilty.
  - olliej 3y ago
    She's not in jail, and that's after she was already busted trying to flee the country while out on bail, yet the refusal to put her behind bars despite having been found guilty while she tries to reduce her jail time is an absurd indication of the corruption of justice allowed by being rich. She can appeal for a sentence reduction from behind bars, just like everyone else who isn't rich. Meanwhile people who haven't caused people to die, who haven't caused major harm to others, and who haven't been convicted of anything at all are in jail because they can't afford bail.
MPlus88 3y ago
[dead]
DoreenMichele 3y ago
She claimed to be celibate in her twenties due to her devotion to her company. Reality: She was living with a much older man who invested in the company. I strongly suspect this is not how male founders typically operate. I also still believe her gender was a barrier to her getting meaningful feedback, an opinion that generally draws hatred -- and never mind that it's the opinion of a woman wondering So, how does a woman founder make a successful company? ("Asking for a friend" -- by which I mean me, of course.)
- edmundsauto 3y ago
  I suspect that being a woman was both a help and a hindrance. Ultimately, it hindered her because she didn't get the reality checks that an unattractive person would have received - or when she got them, she didn't have to listen because there was a fawning group of VCs vying for her attention. However, I also suspect most people would choose to have easy access to money due to network and attractiveness, even if it meant not having to accept the truth. I don't think there are many lessons for anyone from Elizabeth Holmes' story, woman or man; founder or not.
  - DoreenMichele 3y ago
    I suspect that being a woman was both a help and a hindrance. The company went from a valuation of $10 billion to zero overnight and she's been sentenced to 11 years in prison for fraud. As far as I can tell, her gender in no way "helped" anything good. It likely helped grow this debacle into one of much larger proportions than it otherwise likely would have been. And when I talk about that, I usually get dismissed out of hand, not taken seriously as a woman going "So, let's say you're a woman -- as I am -- and want to actually start a real business. Just how does one not end up with this kind of debacle if my thoughts on how and why it went so badly have any merit?"

9 points by Maro 3y ago

bagacrap 3y ago

Guess this is the first time the reporter has encountered someone with antisocial personality disorder.

jstarfish 3y ago
> “Elizabeth is a very, very charismatic person. When she speaks to you, she makes you feel like you are the most important person in her world in that moment. She almost has this reality distortion field around her that people can just get sucked into.” > “I still dream about being able to contribute in that space,” Holmes tells her. “I still feel the same calling to it as I always did and I still think the need is there.” > “I was admittedly swept up in Liz as an authentic and sympathetic person. She’s gentle and charismatic, in a quiet way. My editor laughed at me when I shared these impressions, telling me (and I quote), ‘Amy Chozick, you got rolled!'” Characteristics of Narcissistic personality disorder, not APD. I actually believe that she's genuine in her intentions-- she's just completely fucking clueless and surrounded by enablers (self-selected, of course-- never challenge these people or you'll get cut out of their next big thing). Her "success" feeds her own grandiosity so she reaches for more. It's like watching a child star trying to adapt to aging out of what made them famous in the first place. Prisons are full of APDs. They don't bother with pageantry, they just knife you in the gut, steal your shit, leave you for dead, and never think about you again.
- bagacrap 3y ago
  I think she is probably both. Anyway, Mrs. Holmes will herself be imprisoned soon, so I guess she'll be the odd one out if her diagnosis is just NPD.

daniel-cussen 3y ago

[dead]

incahoots 3y ago

I was pretty dismayed how NYT framed her as this "life turnaround, devoted mother" facade when in reality she put lives in danger by promising a fancy scam. I generally don't care about the investors she duped, they should've performed their due diligence and they didn't. What Theranos proved is that 'investors' will back your company if you wear a fancy turtleneck, and speak to prospects like Jobs did. Ridiculous all around, the real victims got nothing. Just another reminder that the law only works for those who can afford it.

brianwawok 3y ago
To me the NYT piece read as “lol here’s the current scam of Holmes”. I guess my lens is rather harsh though :)
- incahoots 3y ago
  I think we can both agree she's utilizing the oldest scam known to man. I recently heard someone coin her as the 'tyler durden girlboss', gave me a chuckle.

pessimizer 3y ago

These people keep projecting their own attraction to certain people onto those people. She's not magical, you just love being in the presence of rich, pretty, young white ladies. Your desire is not one of her qualities (or her fault, really.) The most astounding thing about Theranos was how little work it took to pull the fraud, and how chintzy it was around the edges. If you had been born where she was, looked like she looked, and had powerful older men constantly blowing smoke up your ass and declaring you a wunderkind, it would be hard to resist scamming them. The army of fawning reporters (and ex-generals and other officials) are the real problem. You're not giving us a peek behind Holmes's curtain, you were Holmes's curtain.

throwawaymaths 3y ago
Great point, but: > it would be hard to resist scamming them I don't think she even scammed them. She really believes she can do all the things. Her fraud was not a scam, it was just covering failures and fake it till you make it without discernment or introspection (doing it in a field where you really need to stop faking it sooner)
- logdap 3y ago
  > just covering failures and fake it till you make it without discernment or introspection (doing it in a field where you really need to stop faking it sooner) In a word: scamming. Even her voice is fake.
- stcroixx 3y ago
  Guess we'll have to keep sending people to prison until y'all get that your 'fake it till you make it' is in fact fraud, which most people understand as a kind of scam.
  - throwawaymaths 3y ago
    It's not fraud if you tell your investors (and when you have customers, your customers) how you're faking it. "fake it till you make it" generally means "your product is egregiously incomplete for X reason(s)" and in many cases, the investors know this and willing to take the risk. It's on the investors to do due diligence and assess whether or not the risk is up to their level of appetite. I do believe that holmes was doing this for the much of her run with Theranos. That is normal startup behavior, and not really unethical, and certainly not illegal, though it can be spectacularly misguided, as we saw. At the point where she started hiding what she was doing, it became "fake it till you make it" that is ALSO fraud. So no. For chrissakes, Don't generally send people who "fake it till they make it" to prison.

seanhunter 3y ago

It's really astonishing that she seems to be getting away with it (again). I sincerely hope that's not the case.

dan-rocks 3y ago
How is she getting away with it? She will serve 11 years in federal prison for her crimes.
- lesuorac 3y ago
  I mean if she can keep delaying her sentence she won't be serving 11 years ... Ask yourself, if I did what she did would I be in prison right now or maybe in the future?
  - olliej 3y ago
    Of course not, because that would also mean you had been scammed millions you could spend on lawyers to defend yourself :D Better question: if you went around shoplifting stores for a week, were arrested, got bail, and then were caught buying a one way ticket to a non-extradition country would you still be out on bail? even before being found guilty.
- olliej 3y ago
  She's not in jail, and that's after she was already busted trying to flee the country while out on bail, yet the refusal to put her behind bars despite having been found guilty while she tries to reduce her jail time is an absurd indication of the corruption of justice allowed by being rich. She can appeal for a sentence reduction from behind bars, just like everyone else who isn't rich. Meanwhile people who haven't caused people to die, who haven't caused major harm to others, and who haven't been convicted of anything at all are in jail because they can't afford bail.

MPlus88 3y ago

[dead]

DoreenMichele 3y ago

She claimed to be celibate in her twenties due to her devotion to her company. Reality: She was living with a much older man who invested in the company. I strongly suspect this is not how male founders typically operate. I also still believe her gender was a barrier to her getting meaningful feedback, an opinion that generally draws hatred -- and never mind that it's the opinion of a woman wondering So, how does a woman founder make a successful company? ("Asking for a friend" -- by which I mean me, of course.)

edmundsauto 3y ago
I suspect that being a woman was both a help and a hindrance. Ultimately, it hindered her because she didn't get the reality checks that an unattractive person would have received - or when she got them, she didn't have to listen because there was a fawning group of VCs vying for her attention. However, I also suspect most people would choose to have easy access to money due to network and attractiveness, even if it meant not having to accept the truth. I don't think there are many lessons for anyone from Elizabeth Holmes' story, woman or man; founder or not.
- DoreenMichele 3y ago
  I suspect that being a woman was both a help and a hindrance. The company went from a valuation of $10 billion to zero overnight and she's been sentenced to 11 years in prison for fraud. As far as I can tell, her gender in no way "helped" anything good. It likely helped grow this debacle into one of much larger proportions than it otherwise likely would have been. And when I talk about that, I usually get dismissed out of hand, not taken seriously as a woman going "So, let's say you're a woman -- as I am -- and want to actually start a real business. Just how does one not end up with this kind of debacle if my thoughts on how and why it went so badly have any merit?"