Tangential to #2, there’s a scenario where this ends up as a reputational nightmare for EA.
If SBF committed fraud, there’s a distinct possibility that SBF will use altruism as a defence and/or justification for his actions in the coming months.
If the above happens, the issue may not die anytime soon. Given the scope of the event, and Sam’s prominence within EA, it would become a borderline obligation for any media outlet to mention it in any coverage of EA for years to come.
Depending on how things break, anyone with a public association with EA may be viewed through the lens of either “dangerously overcommitted to utilitarianism,” or “using EA as a cover for unethical behaviour.”
The author that Sequoia paid to write SBF’s puff piece (linked in earlier comment) has already put out a tweet to this effect:
A bad day for #SBF but even worse for #EA. Is this #ultilitarianism as psychological cover to run a #Ponzi scheme?
My concern at this point is the willingness of MacAskill and other prominent EA’s to condemn SBF. “Wait and see” is often preferred, but there may be permanent damage to EA’s reputation if SBF is not disavowed by EA leadership in due time.
If SBF committed fraud, there’s a distinct possibility that SBF will use altruism as a defence and/or justification for his actions in the coming months.
Sadly, I think his having been the second largest donor to the Biden 2020 campaign fund will be a more effective defence. It certainly worked for the people who lost hundreds of billions of Other People’s Money in 2008.
Tangential to #2, there’s a scenario where this ends up as a reputational nightmare for EA.
If SBF committed fraud, there’s a distinct possibility that SBF will use altruism as a defence and/or justification for his actions in the coming months.
If the above happens, the issue may not die anytime soon. Given the scope of the event, and Sam’s prominence within EA, it would become a borderline obligation for any media outlet to mention it in any coverage of EA for years to come.
Depending on how things break, anyone with a public association with EA may be viewed through the lens of either “dangerously overcommitted to utilitarianism,” or “using EA as a cover for unethical behaviour.”
The author that Sequoia paid to write SBF’s puff piece (linked in earlier comment) has already put out a tweet to this effect:
https://twitter.com/AdamcFisher/status/1590466104773992448
My concern at this point is the willingness of MacAskill and other prominent EA’s to condemn SBF. “Wait and see” is often preferred, but there may be permanent damage to EA’s reputation if SBF is not disavowed by EA leadership in due time.
Sadly, I think his having been the second largest donor to the Biden 2020 campaign fund will be a more effective defence. It certainly worked for the people who lost hundreds of billions of Other People’s Money in 2008.
seems he has ended up giving more to the democratic party than ea lol