Hacker Read top | best | new | newcomments | leaders | about | bookmarklet login

Question: Will SBF still be a millionaire many times over after this?


view as:

He will likely end up in jail. If he's not in jail by the end of this there is just serious corruption.

The corporate structure surrounding FTX is so complex, and given that Elizabeth Holmes is still walking free, I would guess it will be a long long time before anyone involved here sees a jail cell.

Elizabeth Holmes defrauded investors. SBF gambled with customer deposits. I’d say the stakes are higher.

Edit: fixed formatting.


Plus, Holmes was judged to be guilty, the sentencing will be this week: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2022/nov/14/theranos-...

I'm just saying that it's been 7 years since the fraud went public

Yeah. The SEC was created to protect the general public. Not “sophisticated investors ” (aka those who care afford to lose money)

Holmes made up device was in a few Walgreens giving people made up medical test results. I disagree the stakes are higher here.

He's a citizen of the most corrupt country in the world and the (only?) one that legalised that corruption and gave it a different name. He was the biggest donor to the governing party.

He'll be fine.


> He lives in USA

This is incorrect, he's an actual physical resident of the Bahamas, where FTX is also domiciled.


Thanks, fixed.

Most corrupt country in the world? By what measure?

It's legal in your country to pay huge sums of money to your politicians in order to buy influence. Ergo the laws of the country and the actions of the government are for sale to the highest bidder.

In most other countries, this would land people in jail, but in the US it's so utterly brazen that you can find the details online. See https://www.opensecrets.org/

Don't forget that the very phrase "Banana Republic" is a result of US corporations that had bought the US govt and gotten them to oust governments in 3rd world countries for the benefit of those US corporations.


Transparency International maintains a global corruption index - the US ranks 27th in terms of "least corrupt" which is within the top quintile. Many other countries rank worse. For example, Fiji is rated 45th on the index.

You can absolutely use money to influence politicians in the US, but that's likely true of wherever you live too. New Zealand is a very not-corrupt country according to the corruption index, but I seem to recall Peter Thiel had no trouble purchasing citizenship in contravention of their laws - I'm sure money had nothing to do with that though.


> The US ranks 27th in terms of "least corrupt"

Oh yes, that's why I consider them the worst. They're so corrupt they legalised it and have conned organisations like Transparency International into believing that in the US, paying off politicians isn't corruption. That's the funniest part... they call it speech.

But the same "speech" in any other country is considered corruption and bribery.

You were able to point to the NZ example with Peter Thiel precisely because corruption is so rare there and there was a massive outcry about his case.


Paying off politicians in the US is illegal and it is prosecuted. As I mentioned, money buys you undue influence over politicians in the US - but that's true in every country. There is no reason to think the US is more corrupt than most countries, or the most corrupt in the world - as you've said. What evidence there is shows that US has unusually low levels of corruption relative to the other countries in the world.

The Transparency International index is based off of a survey of residents asking questions about perceived corruption. Paying off politicians, even if it were done as legal campaign contributions, would contribute to perceived corruption.

I know about the Peter Thiel example not because there was a massive outcry, I have basically no exposure to New Zealand news, but because I read about Peter Thiel and came across the story that way. I have no doubt that all I'd have to do to find an unending stream of money influencing New Zealand politicians is go to Google and search for it. But, I don't need to, because I already know that money is a corrupting influence worldwide - not just in the US.


> The Transparency International index is based off of a survey of residents asking questions about perceived corruption

That's very convenient for the US, and why it managed to avoid being #1 on the list.

In India a small businessman gets annoyed that he has to pay a $20 bribe to have an operating license issued, but it works. He will tell Transparency Intlt that bribery is rampant. In the US there is no bribe a small business owner can pay to make his business work because the multinational billion dollar corporation with offices on Wall Street, D.C, and every other major city has paid off the legislators and had them introduce laws that introduce a barrier to entry that no small business could ever scale. The US small business owner will honestly tell Transparency Intl that he's never had to bribe anyone.

opensecrets.org


OK but you said the USA is the *most* corrupt country in the world. Meaning if there is even *one* country more corrupt, the US isn't the most corrupt. Why is the US more corrupt than India or Russia for example?

Good question.

My answer is that in those two countries, bribing legislators is illegal, while enforcement is poor.

In the US, it's all been made legal, so happens on a massive scale right out in the open.

In India a small businessman gets annoyed that he has to pay a $20 bribe to have an operating license issued, but it works. In the US there is no bribe he can pay to make his business work because the multinational billion dollar corporation with offices on Wall Street, D.C, and every other major city has paid off the legislators and had them introduce laws that introduce a barrier to entry that no small business could ever scale.

opensecrets.org


The Bahamas is the most corrupt country in the world?

No, there's no world in which he is. Fraud on this level will see massive forfeiture as directed by the SEC and DOJ and then civil suits will clean up anything left afterward he's released from prison.

one thing crypto is pretty decent for is hiding a bunch of money from authorities

> No, there's no world in which he is

Sure there is.

The scenario where he escape with a suitcase of gold to a country without extradition.

Or another scenario would be if he had serious blackmail on several key govt officials.


You need nothing that heavy.

Many printed out bitcoins fit in an envelope.


Printed out bitcoins?

Yes having bitcoins is just having a private key. In 12 or 24 words format a wallet can even be memorized if needed. The blockchain is the global ledger of how much money there is on corresponding public keys.

When you're hitting at that level you can't hide, not anymore. Maybe in the 70s. Countries without extradition aren't usually the kinds of places you want to go these days, and people there are bound to know who you are and shake you down when you're a globally known rich guy.

For time being he seems to be firmly stuck in the Bahamas and I doubt he's going anywhere except in handcuffs.

The Alameda CEO, though, was last spotted in Hong Kong, which offers many more possibilities.


yea, but probably not with gold. Besides dealing with the physical difficulties of it, it was a crypto exchange after all which also just got magically "hacked" when things started to go downhill. sure getting out that crypto isn't the easiest but likely easier than millions in gold.

Legal | privacy