This post was enjoyable as heck to read. Thanks for taking the time to write it.
I guess I’m of two minds about the effective altruism of it all.
One one hand: It kinda just seems like a bunch of self-identified effective altruists, who were well-meaning but perhaps naive, got blinded by money and suckered into servitude by a smart and charismatic leader who was successful at scamming a lot of people. Maybe there isn’t a big lesson about EA philosophy or the EA subculture. Maybe this is just like any other cult leader or con artist or corrupt CEO manipulating a lot of smart, sane, good-hearted people.
On the other hand: Maybe there’s something a bit cult-y about EA subculture and something about EA philosophy’s rejection of common sense and folk morality that made people associated with effective altruism extra susceptible to the Sam Bankman-Fried mind virus. Maybe people in the EA movement need more common sense and more folk morality. Maybe EA people also need more intellectual humility and more healthy skepticism of EA, such that they are more willing to balance EA philosophy with common sense and balance utilitarian ethics with folk morality.
I’m empathetic to the people who got taken in by SBF and I don’t judge them harshly. I’ve been scammed before. I’ve been overzealous about non-common sense ideas before. A guy who seems really good at making money trading crypto and wants to donate it all to buy anti-malarial bed nets? On the face of it, what’s wrong with that?
Maybe the more interesting question is: why didn’t the exodus of the initial management team at Alameda result in SBF’s reputation getting destroyed in the EA community? Did the people who left not speak up enough to make that happen? Were they silenced by fear of reprisal? Were they too burnt out and defeated to do much after leaving? Were they embarrassed that Sam manipulated them?
Or did others, especially leaders in the EA community, not listen to them? Did they get blinded by dollar signs in their eyes? Did they find it easier to shoo away inconvenient allegations?
This post was enjoyable as heck to read. Thanks for taking the time to write it.
I guess I’m of two minds about the effective altruism of it all.
One one hand: It kinda just seems like a bunch of self-identified effective altruists, who were well-meaning but perhaps naive, got blinded by money and suckered into servitude by a smart and charismatic leader who was successful at scamming a lot of people. Maybe there isn’t a big lesson about EA philosophy or the EA subculture. Maybe this is just like any other cult leader or con artist or corrupt CEO manipulating a lot of smart, sane, good-hearted people.
On the other hand: Maybe there’s something a bit cult-y about EA subculture and something about EA philosophy’s rejection of common sense and folk morality that made people associated with effective altruism extra susceptible to the Sam Bankman-Fried mind virus. Maybe people in the EA movement need more common sense and more folk morality. Maybe EA people also need more intellectual humility and more healthy skepticism of EA, such that they are more willing to balance EA philosophy with common sense and balance utilitarian ethics with folk morality.
I’m empathetic to the people who got taken in by SBF and I don’t judge them harshly. I’ve been scammed before. I’ve been overzealous about non-common sense ideas before. A guy who seems really good at making money trading crypto and wants to donate it all to buy anti-malarial bed nets? On the face of it, what’s wrong with that?
Maybe the more interesting question is: why didn’t the exodus of the initial management team at Alameda result in SBF’s reputation getting destroyed in the EA community? Did the people who left not speak up enough to make that happen? Were they silenced by fear of reprisal? Were they too burnt out and defeated to do much after leaving? Were they embarrassed that Sam manipulated them?
Or did others, especially leaders in the EA community, not listen to them? Did they get blinded by dollar signs in their eyes? Did they find it easier to shoo away inconvenient allegations?