Regardless of whether or not corruption is the case, it only has forward guarantees if there is a hint of blackmail involved.
Donating a bunch of money to a group gives you no power over that group unless they think there is more on the table. When you’re about to get arrested they will cut all ties immediately unless there is an actual obligation to support you.
I've definitely seen several people claim it on HN. Almost invariably, such comments were downvoted into oblivion though, or had replies basically saying something along the lines of "what crack are you smoking?"
and several similar comments scattered throughout, that Dems will pardon him. So yes, delusion on HN is quite real. And crypto news attracts a deeply paranoid, cynical sort of mind, who have seen a glimpse of some big conspiracy and can't let go of it.
I have seen a some posters on HN and a lot of posters else where trying to use this case to bash the Democratic party. It very annoying because they never provide evidence to back up their claims.
You also see a lot of people bashing Sam Bankman-Fried’s parents or accusing them of committing crimes without providing any evidence.
To be fair, 90% of all people won't admit they were wrong.
Sidenote, I think HN will be wrong on Elon Musk and X as well over the long term (personal opinion of course). But the way the discourse around X has changed on HN is incredible.
When Parag Agarwal was made CEO, everyone on HN complained about the platform and how a subscription model was the way to go. Now that Elon Musk has instated a subscription model, (seemingly) all on HN agrees he's running the company into the ground.
Seems to be happening a lot more often over the past 4 or 5 years.
Wondering if its perhaps two different subsets of people, with differing opinions that haven’t so much shifted, as that primarily just one’s been highly motivated to engage at a time? (In the same way that say surveys might draw disproportionately more engagement from those that feel extremely dissatisfied)
If you like HN commentators being wrong, you’ll love this initial thread on Alameda being insolvent [0]. I post only in jest, as hindsight makes much of this hilarious.
Eh, he must be pretty much broke now so why would politicians from either party care about him anymore? He made his donations and they looked the other way on regulating crypto.
His campaign finance trial is March 11, sentencing March 28. I think it’s reasonable to speculate on whether he’ll plead guilty in exchange for clemency at sentencing. Who knows. I don’t think anybody reasonable has ever believed a pardon is on the table for the largest fraud ever.
I don't care either way, but I would guess most people expect that the sentencing to be very light if you have friends in important places.. not that you're just totally let off on all charges.
