The most revealing detail is the PR plan. It shows the machinery behind the public persona: legal strategy, media appearances, ideological repositioning, and "radical honesty" all treated as narrative management. It matters because it helps people see how public reality gets shaped, not just reported.
zonezero•54m ago
My take away was that he actually made everyone a boat load of money.
It appeared as though it was his lack of rigor and discipline (keeping books properly) which did him in, not dishonesty.
In the end, I had the impression there was a witch hunt for cons when the crypto market dipped.
Is that not how it was? I didn’t follow too closely and I’m not a fan or anything. It only seemed like he was an idealist born of privilege on cloud nine without appropriate formal training in finance.
Terr_•45m ago
Oh no, he's found HN! :p
> It appeared as though it was his lack of rigor and discipline (keeping books properly) which did him in, not dishonesty.
"How was I supposed to know it was wrong to lie and secretly 'borrow' other people's money without permission use it to gamble at the casino over and over!? It's society's fault for not ensuring I was properly educated in these extremely fine points of post-graduate human behavior."
Would you really accept that logic from the manager at any gas-station convenience store, let alone someone with Bankman-Fried's wealth and advantages in life?
Oh, I'm sure he made a lot of "technical" breaches too, but mostly like how a bank-robber also has an improperly licensed firearm and a double-parked getaway vehicle with old license-plates.
> he actually made everyone a boat load of money.
Like Bernie Madoff did? No, lots and lots of people lost money, and—in order to disguise it for a while—he ensured a much smaller number of people got some of the remaining pile.
seanhunter•28m ago
That is not at all how it was and this is strangely similar to the (also untrue) astroturf narrative that got repeated about Martin Shkreli after he got imprisoned for fraud.
FTX users lost money to Alameda by Alameda being able to trade without collateral. He literally stole money from users of his exchange by allowing this.
It absolutely is not lack of rigor and discipline - He was dishonest about it.
wslh•1h ago
zonezero•54m ago
It appeared as though it was his lack of rigor and discipline (keeping books properly) which did him in, not dishonesty.
In the end, I had the impression there was a witch hunt for cons when the crypto market dipped.
Is that not how it was? I didn’t follow too closely and I’m not a fan or anything. It only seemed like he was an idealist born of privilege on cloud nine without appropriate formal training in finance.
Terr_•45m ago
> It appeared as though it was his lack of rigor and discipline (keeping books properly) which did him in, not dishonesty.
"How was I supposed to know it was wrong to lie and secretly 'borrow' other people's money without permission use it to gamble at the casino over and over!? It's society's fault for not ensuring I was properly educated in these extremely fine points of post-graduate human behavior."
Would you really accept that logic from the manager at any gas-station convenience store, let alone someone with Bankman-Fried's wealth and advantages in life?
Oh, I'm sure he made a lot of "technical" breaches too, but mostly like how a bank-robber also has an improperly licensed firearm and a double-parked getaway vehicle with old license-plates.
> he actually made everyone a boat load of money.
Like Bernie Madoff did? No, lots and lots of people lost money, and—in order to disguise it for a while—he ensured a much smaller number of people got some of the remaining pile.
seanhunter•28m ago
FTX users lost money to Alameda by Alameda being able to trade without collateral. He literally stole money from users of his exchange by allowing this.
It absolutely is not lack of rigor and discipline - He was dishonest about it.