I’d highlight that I found taking quite a structured approach helpful: breaking things down chronologically, and trying to answer specific questions like what’s the mechanism, how much did this contribute, and what’s a concrete recommendation?
“I’ll suggest a framework for how that broader review might be conducted: for each topic the review could:
Establish the details of EA involvement,
Indicate a mechanism for how this could have indirectly contributed to the eventual financial crime,
Provide some assessment of to what extent that mechanism may have indirectly contributed, and
Provide a concrete recommendation for what the EA community could do differently to prevent any recurrence.
I’ll also provide some preliminary thoughts below, as an indication of what could be done in the full review. One way to approach a review is chronological, covering eight touchstone or ‘gate’ moments:
Bankman-Fried starts earning to give
Alameda founding
FTX founding
Early political donations through Bankman-Fried’s family
FTX Foundation and Future Fund founding
Bankman-Fried becomes a public face of EA
Whistleblowing
This may be too exhaustive or “self-flagellating” for some, but I think it can identify areas to improve and fix. As will become clear, I think that step 5, the founding of the FTX Foundation and Future Fund, is where the biggest questions are raised and where I make the most recommendations.”
I’ve made a first attempt at this here: To what extent & how did EA indirectly contribute to financial crime—and what can be done now? One attempt at a review
I’d highlight that I found taking quite a structured approach helpful: breaking things down chronologically, and trying to answer specific questions like what’s the mechanism, how much did this contribute, and what’s a concrete recommendation?