abrowne 1 hour ago

Bankman won't be Fried

3stacks 1 hour ago

Scam Bankman-Fraud is just one of the few highly publicised cases they will use to pretend they are actually serious about tackling these issues. Wake me when someone gets prosecuted for front-running Axios' "Iran deal is imminent" articles in the oil market.

jmyeet 1 hour ago
  • matwood 55 minutes ago

    Yeah, it's odd he can't scrape together a couple million and just get a pardon. It seems like the people who were able to pick up FTX claims for .50-.60 on the dollar, and have now made a killing, would toss Sam a tip.

    • dylan604 45 minutes ago

      Why would they? What would be the return for them?

  • vessenes 54 minutes ago

    Trump reportedly was disinterested in SBF money. During his tenure, SBF leaned left - with Clinton and others as paid speakers for events.

  • tdb7893 30 minutes ago

    He was a top Democrat donor (the article says he was their number 2 individual donor in 2022) so I doubt he could buy one. Not that he seemed particularly left leaning himself and he also donated to Republicans but 5.2 million publicly to Biden seems like a dealbreaker.

    https://time.com/6241262/sam-bankman-fried-political-donatio...

    • rootsudo 13 minutes ago

      And this is why you play both sides.

NickC25 1 hour ago

How utterly predictable.

throw563 1 hour ago

Small criminals rot in jails but big ones like founder of silk road get out paying the government. This is shows how rotten american government is

  • voganmother42 59 minutes ago

    I think the tiered justice system sucks, but this is no small criminal

Lerc 1 hour ago

>In appealing against the conviction, Bankman-Fried’s defense lawyers argued that US district judge Lewis Kaplan, who oversaw the trial, improperly prevented Bankman-Fried from introducing evidence to back up his belief that FTX had enough funds to cover customer withdrawals.

So it's been a few years now. Did people get their money in the end? That would presumably answer the question of whether they were stolen from. It wouldn't affect any decisions on crimes related to flouting regulations.

  • benzible 1 hour ago

    That is not how any of this works. He was convicted of fraud, and fraud was committed the moment he transferred the funds to Alameda. That he placed some bets that worked out, like his Anthropic investment, doesn't negate the crime any more than if I robbed a bank, placed a winning bet with it and returned the funds with interest.

    • tsunamifury 23 minutes ago

      Except when you pay someone to manage your money.

      Remember this.

      • gcheong 6 minutes ago

        Clarify? I don't understand how whether or not I pay someone to manage my money makes a difference as to whether what they did was commit fraud. People paid Bernie Madoff to manage their money and early investors got promised returns but he still went to jail because he was running an illegal ponzi scheme.

    • root-parent 5 minutes ago

      Proof you can get into MIT and still be completely dumb.

  • sbstp 34 minutes ago

    I think Kraken has been selected to redistribute the funds, but not sure if it has happened yet. These things take time, I think Mt. Gox took like a decade to be distributed

  • xhkkffbf 32 minutes ago

    I think the victims were helped quite a bit by the runup in crypto assets. So even though some was lost, the run up in what was left ended up being quite a bit.

  • Analemma_ 27 minutes ago

    You SBF defenders have such a weird view of how the law works. If I embezzle money from my company and then bet it all on black in Vegas, intending to give it back if I win, your implication here is equivalent to saying I did commit a crime if the wheel comes up red, but I did not commit any crime if it comes up black.