Moreover, if SBF viewed fraudulent behaviour for the purposes of EA as “high-risk high-reward” it signals there are norms within EA that are in dire need of clarification and/or change.
That’s my concern as well.
Just as concerning is how EA (leadership) may have reacted if the events that transpired at FTX were identical but SBF ended up turning billions of profit instead of sustaining immense loss. What would be our reaction to that?
In this alternative universe, I’d imagine he’d receive only a bit of censure, instead being rewarded with significant praise by EA leadership for his willingness to take on risk and make 51 EV bets. Community members might assert that it doesn’t matter what he did so long as the consequences ensured he was going the greatest good possible. They would be captivated, enchanted by promises of further funding.
These condemnations are because SBF committed fraud and lost. If he did all that and won the jackpot, I imagine his reception here would be rather different.
That’s my concern as well.
Just as concerning is how EA (leadership) may have reacted if the events that transpired at FTX were identical but SBF ended up turning billions of profit instead of sustaining immense loss. What would be our reaction to that?
In this alternative universe, I’d imagine he’d receive only a bit of censure, instead being rewarded with significant praise by EA leadership for his willingness to take on risk and make 51 EV bets. Community members might assert that it doesn’t matter what he did so long as the consequences ensured he was going the greatest good possible. They would be captivated, enchanted by promises of further funding.
These condemnations are because SBF committed fraud and lost. If he did all that and won the jackpot, I imagine his reception here would be rather different.