5 ms·
I only skimmed through the beginning but I am not sure what the news is. Looks like they mostly/only? pulled it from some filings that I am sure was being put t
by infecto 2y ago
I only skimmed through the beginning but I am not sure what the news is. Looks like they mostly/only? pulled it from some filings that I am sure was being put together by third party agents.
- dmitrygr 2y ago> I am not sure what the news is The news is that lying on those filings is a federal crime and can lead to jail time (for normal people who are actually subject to law).
- infecto 2y agoYour distorted view of Altman is probably causing you to go down the wrong path of securities law. 1) I don't believe even if malicious this would be a criminal case that leads to jail time. 2) The s-1 filings are prepared and audited by third party companies. 3) Most likely in this case, these positions are listed to outline any potential conflicts of interest. I am not well read on the matter but I could see that you would list potential engagements to note the conflict of interest even if they are not finalized.
- riku_iki 2y ago> 2) The s-1 filings are prepared and audited by third party companies. does it completely release liability?
- infecto 2y agoNo but the point being that multiple people looked at this and most likely this is immaterial to the S1 and would never be on the radar for the SEC.
- dmitrygr 2y ago> The s-1 filings are prepared and audited by third party companies. And signed by…whom?
- infecto 2y agoThat’s not really the point. The point is that this disclosure is immaterial to the spac and might have been true or in process to being true at the time of filing. Nothing will come of this other than a handful of people getting upset.
- yreg 2y agoPeople don't go to jail for errors like these.
- tensility 2y agoNormal folks get fired for "mistakes" like this. Oligarchs don't.
- infecto 2y agoWhat mistake? It’s an immaterial S1 for a SPAC. I don’t believe anyone including the advisors filing this would get in trouble.
- cuttysnark 2y agoThat mistake is that it's not true. Altman has earned a name for himself in the truth-telling/transparency department. He wasn't briefly sacked for his fashion sense. In the article they quote Marc Fagel, who previously served as the regional director for the SEC's office in San Francisco: "Misstating the qualifications of executives is something the SEC takes seriously,"
- yreg 2y agoPretty big difference between getting fired and getting jail time, ain't it? Still, I doubt anyone is getting fired over this. And the document was not written by an oligarch, lol.
- HWR_14 2y agoCan they? I thought SEC violations couldn't result in jail time.
- eduction 2y agoThe claim was repeated on the website of the SPAC itself until the story ran. And the SPAC is run by… Sam Altman.
- infecto 2y agoI guess I don’t see the issue. The SPAC materials are largely pointless and immaterial until an acquisition is made. Purely a guess but I would assume they put these materials together when perhaps the board position was in play. Maybe he was fabricating it but it’s mostly a shrug moment for the SEC.
- irjustin 2y ago> And the SPAC is run by… Sam Altman. Yes, but this comes with the assumption that Sam writes and reviews the website copy, PR statements and S1 form submissions, which any organization of significant size, the CEO does not. I could believe Elon does though.
- jlarocco 2y agoWhy do I get the feeling that if it said something bad they would have fixed it before somebody wrote an article about it... And if they can't be trusted to get their own team biographies right, what can they get right? If a run-of-the mill employee were lying about their experience, they'd be fired. But it's okay for the CEO because he's just so busy? What a double standard. Did they use their own product to write the bio, and it "hallucinated" that he was chairman?
- refulgentis 2y agoI saw the same odd excuse deployed for the aggressive NDAs he was embarrassed to find out happened I think it's a mix of feels good to feel empathetic and say gee prolly just slipped by him, things slip by me, and then without interlocutors, could we ever have discussion? But it's an odd one
- pempem 2y agoIts assumed that many many people involved in an already really cloaked investment vehicle know that Sam is not. Thats the point. Not that Sam wrote it, that the organization signed off on it.