The default hypothesis should be that, while his EA ambitions may have been real, SBF’s impetus to steal from his users had little to nothing to do with EA and everything to do with him and his close associates retaining their status as rich successful startup founders. Sam & crew were clearly enjoying immense prestige derived from their fame and fortune, even if none of them owned a yacht. When people in that position prop Alameda up with billions of dollars of user funds rather than give up those privileges, I think the reasonable assumption is that they’re doing it to protect that status, not save the lightcone. I find it highly odd that no one has mentioned this as a plausible explanation.
I’m not sure why that should be the default hypothesis. Do you have specific information about them in particular or is that based on general psychology? Power corrupts is a common saying but how strong is the effect really?
I’d like to see more evidence of that.
When someone in a position where they stand to lose a lot commits fraud to stop that happening, the default assumption is they did it to save their own skin, not for any higher motives. Or never ascribe to ideals what can be ascribed to selfishness.
The default hypothesis should be that, while his EA ambitions may have been real, SBF’s impetus to steal from his users had little to nothing to do with EA and everything to do with him and his close associates retaining their status as rich successful startup founders. Sam & crew were clearly enjoying immense prestige derived from their fame and fortune, even if none of them owned a yacht. When people in that position prop Alameda up with billions of dollars of user funds rather than give up those privileges, I think the reasonable assumption is that they’re doing it to protect that status, not save the lightcone. I find it highly odd that no one has mentioned this as a plausible explanation.
I’m not sure why that should be the default hypothesis. Do you have specific information about them in particular or is that based on general psychology? Power corrupts is a common saying but how strong is the effect really? I’d like to see more evidence of that.
When someone in a position where they stand to lose a lot commits fraud to stop that happening, the default assumption is they did it to save their own skin, not for any higher motives. Or never ascribe to ideals what can be ascribed to selfishness.
It depends on when the “stealing” began. I haven’t followed the thing closely enough to know. Banks reinvest funds too—it’s just more regulated.