I think what his public official motive would be is obvious: heās always tried to get people to do things he thinks have positive altruistic impact-for example, by writing books advocating they do stuff-so he was doing the same with potentially influential people at a more 1-1 level. I donāt think this is something thatās ever been hidden! I can see why you might reasonably think this sort of influence seeking feels a bit off, since on some level it is an attempt to exercise power in a way the bypasses democracy. Iām sure someone has criticized it on those grounds. But organizations recruiting talented college students is quite normal in itself, even if they donāt usually have to sign on to a detailed philosophy. And even the latter is hardly unique: think of someone trying to network informally for people to get involved with their new libertarian think tank, or socialist magazine.
Oh, yeah, I totally agree. I donāt think of it as a way to bypass democracy or exercise undue influence. The main thing for me is that SBF and MacAskill are so interconnected. I thought it was primarily a philosophical connection, but the financial connection seems just as important, especially since MacAskill has been involved in every single part of SBFās career. The first job at Jane Street, the arbitrage, the founding of Alameda, and now all the FTX crap.
Outside recent political donations, it seems that SBF was shoveling most of his donations money back into MacAskillās organizations. (Someone else linked to his old blog, which gives a glimpse of this: http://āāmeasuringshadowsblog.blogspot.com/āā)
Now that SBFās biggest endeavor has turned out to be a giant scam, itās important to understand what MacAskill knew about everything and whether any of the same kind of financial misconduct is going on at any of the charitable organizations. Iām sure weāll know a lot more soon, though.
āNow that SBFās biggest endeavor has turned out to be a giant scamā Iām not sure that is quite right. As far as I can tell, the main definite issue that has been proven is that he stole money when he lost money, which is not quite the same as the endeavor itself being a scam from the beginning. Not that that is any morally better, and it was so deeply, deeply morally wrong that I strongly suspect SBF has done other very bad things, but itās good to be precise I think. (I agree that Will had a severe conflict of interest, but I do think we have to stress that thereās no strong direct evidence of wrongdoing on his part yet, and that getting rich people to fund you is a standard charity/āpolitical party model used by everyone, even if known to be problematic and even if Will and SBF seem to have been unusually connected.)
I think what his public official motive would be is obvious: heās always tried to get people to do things he thinks have positive altruistic impact-for example, by writing books advocating they do stuff-so he was doing the same with potentially influential people at a more 1-1 level. I donāt think this is something thatās ever been hidden! I can see why you might reasonably think this sort of influence seeking feels a bit off, since on some level it is an attempt to exercise power in a way the bypasses democracy. Iām sure someone has criticized it on those grounds. But organizations recruiting talented college students is quite normal in itself, even if they donāt usually have to sign on to a detailed philosophy. And even the latter is hardly unique: think of someone trying to network informally for people to get involved with their new libertarian think tank, or socialist magazine.
Oh, yeah, I totally agree. I donāt think of it as a way to bypass democracy or exercise undue influence. The main thing for me is that SBF and MacAskill are so interconnected. I thought it was primarily a philosophical connection, but the financial connection seems just as important, especially since MacAskill has been involved in every single part of SBFās career. The first job at Jane Street, the arbitrage, the founding of Alameda, and now all the FTX crap.
Outside recent political donations, it seems that SBF was shoveling most of his donations money back into MacAskillās organizations. (Someone else linked to his old blog, which gives a glimpse of this: http://āāmeasuringshadowsblog.blogspot.com/āā)
Now that SBFās biggest endeavor has turned out to be a giant scam, itās important to understand what MacAskill knew about everything and whether any of the same kind of financial misconduct is going on at any of the charitable organizations. Iām sure weāll know a lot more soon, though.
āNow that SBFās biggest endeavor has turned out to be a giant scamā Iām not sure that is quite right. As far as I can tell, the main definite issue that has been proven is that he stole money when he lost money, which is not quite the same as the endeavor itself being a scam from the beginning. Not that that is any morally better, and it was so deeply, deeply morally wrong that I strongly suspect SBF has done other very bad things, but itās good to be precise I think. (I agree that Will had a severe conflict of interest, but I do think we have to stress that thereās no strong direct evidence of wrongdoing on his part yet, and that getting rich people to fund you is a standard charity/āpolitical party model used by everyone, even if known to be problematic and even if Will and SBF seem to have been unusually connected.)