Sam Bankman-Fried: Trust Is Everything
Ironically, the FTX meltdown is the best illustration yet of why the world needs bitcoin.
HD DownloadEconomies are built on trust.
Will the bank keep your money safe and accessible? Will the seller mail you those vintage action figures? Will eBay make you whole if the package never arrives?
Trust is everything. And it depends on reputation.
Sam Bankman-Fried—a.k.a. SBF, the founder and CEO of the now-defunct crypto exchange FTX—earned trust by winning the approval of elite institutions. Then he allegedly siphoned about $10 billion of customer deposits into a hedge fund run by his purported ex-girlfriend who then squandered it on risky bets that didn't pay off.
Sequoia Capital, Silicon Valley's premier venture capital fund, trusted SBF enough to invest over $200 million. Crypto lender BlockFi trusted him enough that it's now facing bankruptcy. And, of course, retail investors trusted him to keep their money safe. They're unlikely to see any of it ever again.
Unlike blue-chip financial institutions that gain trust by being too big to fail—meaning taxpayers will provide a backstop—SBF did it in part by winning the affection of the progressive elite in a way that set him apart from the usual libertarian crypto bros.
The World Economic Forum hosted him as a speaker in Davos, Switzerland, listing FTX as a corporate partner. Journalists fawned over him, including Fortune magazine, which asked if he was "the next Warren Buffett" in a cover story that evoked another infamous profile.
Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Chief Gary Gensler is accused by one congressman of helping the company to create a "regulatory monopoly." As the second-largest donor to Democratic politicians in the lead-up to the 2022 midterms, SBF branded himself a new kind of capitalist, a different sort of billionaire.
SBF was an "effective altruist," or part of a movement that encourages its adherents to make as much money as they can so that they can give it all to charities that they deem maximally efficient at alleviating suffering.
"So the ethics stuff - mostly a front?" Vox reporter Kelsey Piper asked SBF via Twitter direct message after FTX filed for Chapter 11.
"Yeah," replied SBF. "it's what reputations are made of, to some extent. I feel bad for those who get fucked by it. By this dumb game we woke westerners play where we say all the right shiboleths and so everyone likes us."
Real effective altruism might be a legitimate method for deciding which charities to support with money that was earned honestly. But SBF is an alleged fraudster who represented the antithesis of Milton Friedman's claim that "the social responsibility of business is to increase its profits," which the Nobel Prize–winning economist wrote about in a 1970 New York Times essay.
It's an especially important message at a moment in which special interest groups are bullying companies to adhere to an investment strategy called Environmental, Social, and Governance—or ESG—which prioritizes social goals over return on investment. The SEC is gearing up to regulate ESG ratings, threatening to turn this trendy "stakeholder capitalism" into a quasi-governmental program.
Friedman believed that philanthropy was a social good but not when it involves corporate executives spending shareholders' money. And he asserted that the "one social responsibility of business" is "to increase its profits so long as it stays within the rules of the game, which is to say, engages in open and free competition without deception fraud."
And deception and fraud are exactly the accusations SBF now faces. Did his claim of prioritizing altruism over maximizing profits allow him to rationalize his alleged theft?
Businessmen who talk about how their companies are "not concerned 'merely' with profit" and about the need for a "'social conscience'…are unwitting puppets of the intellectual forces that have been undermining the basis of a free society these past decades," Friedman wrote.
For SBF, these "shibboleths" were seemingly part of a "dumb game" to dupe progressive elites into helping him win trust. He could have played the same game in a variety of fields, but it's ironic that he chose crypto, an industry derived from an invention that was designed to eliminate the need to trust others with your money.
In the original white paper explaining bitcoin, its pseudonymous founder Satoshi Nakamoto wrote that "what is needed is an electronic payment system based on cryptographic proof instead of trust" and then used the t-word 13 more times.
SBF displayed very little interest in this fundamental proposition at the heart of crypto.
"I think Sam [Bankman-Fried] saw crypto as a means to an end," Jesse Powell, co-founder of the major crypto exchange Kraken, told Reason recently. "Most people in this space see crypto as the end goal. That's what we need to deliver to humanity."
Satoshi wanted to replace trusted third parties with verifiable math, or rules over rulers. The bitcoin network relies on open-source software, and it becomes harder for any single entity to modify as the number of its participants grows and grows.
Bitcoin also made it possible to maintain custody of your own digital money instead of trusting it to a bank or an exchange like FTX.
If anything, this saga shows that Satoshi was right: Don't just trust, verify. And when business owners seem more interested in magazine covers, running in elite circles, cozying up to regulators, and giving away their fortunes instead of making money for their investors, take your money and run the other way.
Produced by Zach Weissmueller; editing and graphics by Regan Taylor; additional graphics by Tomasz Kaye.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
I wonder how much protection Bankman-Fraud will receive from the democrats he purchased?
He had Thanksgiving with his family and is still set to appear in some capacity at the DealBook Summit in two days.
He’s probably still a hero to the democrats.
Great article, Mike. I appreciate your work, I’m now creating over $35000 dollars each month simply by (gbf-03) doing a simple job online! I do know You currently making a lot of greenbacks online from $28000 dollars, its simple online operating jobs.
Just open the link———————————————>>> http://Www.RichApp1.Com
Google pay 200$ per hour my last pay check was $8500 working 1o hours a week online. My younger brother friend has been averaging 12000 for months now and he works about 22 hours a week. I cant believe how easy it was once I tried it outit..
🙂 AND GOOD LUCK.:)
HERE====)> http://WWW.WORKSFUL.COM
35K is for pikers. Blankman-Fraud created billions. Temporarily.
By Any Means Necessary
I get paid over 190$ per hour working from home with 2 kids at home. I never thought I’d be able to do it but my best friend earns over 10k a month doing this and she convinced me to try. The potential with this is endless. Heres what I’ve been doing..
HERE====)> http://WWW.RICHSALARIES.COM
I am making $92 an hour working from home. I never imagined that it was honest to goodness yet my closest companion is earning $16,000 a month by working on a laptop, that was truly astounding for me, she prescribed for me to attempt it simply.
Everybody must try this job now by just using this website. http://www.LiveJob247.com
SBF didn't hang himself.
Did he burn any Clintons?
Google pay 200$ per hour my last pay check was $8500 working 1o hours a week online. My younger brother friend has been averaging 12000 for months now and he works about 22 hours a week. I cant believe how easy it was once I tried it outit..OPEN>> GOOGLE WORK
wait until his little black book leaks out - he'll be "Epsteined"...
He won’t get in any trouble. Haven’t you noticed that there are two sets of laws in this country? Democrats control the media and he will face no trouble because of that. Wouldn’t be surprised if he was given more money as long as he keeps kicking some up to democrats in office. Rules for the but not for me.
Isn't the problem here that he absconded with a lot of their money? Could mean trouble for him. Hopefully, we might out where the rest of the money went if he doesn't "commit suicide" or anything.
in a way that set him apart from the usual libertarian crypto bros.
What the hell, Weissmueller, are you moonlighting for the Huffington Post or something?
LOL
Libertarian = toxic bro culture
Fuck you, Reason.
He set himself apart by donating more, to the approved party.
https://simulationcommander.substack.com/p/ftx-part-i-the-setup
Bonus: Article includes monocle polishing!
Reading this now. It certainly starts strong.
Nice, very nice.
In the land of the blind, the one eyed monocle polisher is king.
Another good one. I also enjoyed the link to the Cato article about Ivermectin by the nurse Lara in the comments:
https://www.cato.org/regulation/summer-2022/ivermectin-together-trial
I went over that in part ii:
https://simulationcommander.substack.com/p/ftx-part-ii-covid-and-the-next-pandemic
Spoiler: Plot twist ahead
Gaear Grimsrud linked this regarding SBF, FTX, and more in the Roundup Thread. It's lengthy, but worth it.
https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/grand-unified-theory-ftx-disaster
The cast of characters you might not notice in this film includes a mega-billionaire with enough influence to keep his life entirely off Wikipedia, a curious gathering of researchers at MIT, and also some familiar faces from the pandemic you might not have realized would pop up in the largest ever cryptocurrency catastrophe (though you might should guess). Also Jeffrey Epstein.
The Epstein angle takes you to some pretty scary places but it's hard to argue with the logic. When the author says "yeah I'm gonna go there" I cringed but ended up going along for the ride.
>>earned trust by winning the approval of elite institutions
elite institutions used him for their own gain. any approval was fictitious.
I am now making $19k or more every month from home by doing very simple and easy job online from home. I have received exactly $20845 last month from this home job. Join now this job and start making cash online by
Follow instruction on website Here...............>>> onlinecareer1
winning, or purchasing?
How does a multi billionaire end up with a girlfriend that looks like a wet rodent?
From the ZeroHedge article Gaear linked:
The second central player in this story is Caroline Ellison, another former Jane Street trader whom SBF brought in to help run Alameda. She is SBF's ex-girlfriend, though it's oddly difficult to find a picture of the two of them in the same place.
Is this a fully mature CEO of a multi-billion dollar quant somethingorother crypto-Ponzi centerpiece, or the sexualized twelve-year-old daughter of one of the world's most powerful university professors? It really looks like Peter Pan's Lost Boys had a little girl tag along, somewhat heterosexualizing the adventure. What could possibly result in such arrested development along one vector dimension? Is this just a particular case of growing up in a heavily cushioned bubble? Or something else?
It's not as if SBF hangs out with Bill Clinton and wears a t-shirt in his Twitter profile advertising the "little girl lover" symbol, and dated a woman who still looks like she's twelve. Wait!
intelligent tramps are the most fun of all.
“Girlfriend” might not be the best description.
Link from the Zerohedge article:
https://torontosun.com/news/world/crypto-kinko-ftx-bros-ex-caroline-ellison-on-bdsm-orgies-pills
Did you get a look at him?
she’s gets really freaky?!
Bitcoin also made it possible to maintain custody of your own digital money instead of trusting it to a bank or an exchange like FTX.
*rubbing my temples*
So we DON'T need these exchanges then.
We've never needed them. Not your keys, not your coins isn't just a snazzy turn of phrase.
That's the most baffling part of the whole story. FTX didn't even need to exist.
It's also the most baffling part of the "Don't overregulate the exchanges, you'll kill the crypto market and bitcoin will never realize its true potential!" narrative.
I would like the pro cryptocurrency people to find an example of privately created currency, or decentralized currency, that remained stable compared to legal tender, and didn't either end with massive devaluation or devolve into a means for private individuals to create a near tyrannical monopoly where workers were basically indentured servants. Also, find an example of decentralized currency or private currency that actually promoted free trade and more equal prosperity. I can think of several examples of private currencies tried in the past, and they almost always created one sided, concentrated prosperity while exacerbating poverty for the majority of those involved. Colonial chartered companies often printed their own 'currency' that they used in the colonies, and it never benefitted the colonists and natives but made the shareholders rich. Mining and factory owners in the 18th and 19th century used company dollars to pay workers, which then could only be used at company owned establishments, reducing workers to near indentured servitude conditions.
Pieces of 8? Granted, they were created by Spain, but once in circulation they needed no government backing.
BTC isn't 'private' in the same way as those currencies, though. You can't just 'print' more of them.
Unless you intended to shovel OP's money into bottomless pits owned by grifters.
You can go into the bank and withdraw your money at any time, spend it on something with tangible value, or put it in a safe or under your mattress too. So, how is crypto better? No fed, but someone is still creating a fiat currency and controlling it somehow. Libertarians just(at least some) seem to think it's better because it's private (but so is the Fed, technically).
Maybe it is a bit more decentralized but guaranteeing and regulating currency-at least saying a dollar is worth 100 cents and a dollar bill will have such and such dimensions with such and such design etc- is one of the few powers a government should have. Before conquest, the Gaulish and western Germanic tribes minted their own currency, but to facilitate trade with Rome, they minted them to similar standards as the Roman Republic. One of the first acts of the Continental Congress was to authorize minting of money, and regulating it (this was so important that the British actually recruited forgers to forge continental dollars to crash the colonial economy).
Yes, states manipulate currency, but it appears (another crypto company just declared bankruptcy today, with up to $11 billion dollars worth of uncovered liabilities) there's at least as much, if not more manipulation in the crypto market. Either you admit government has some duties to perform (currency and defense seem to be two of the most obvious) or you're actually arguing for anarchy. Additionally, in a complex, dispersed culture, the government is better equipped to set standards for a cent, and enforce those standards than any private individual. Yes, for currency, especially non-specie based currencies but even specie based currency, to maintain value you have to have trust in it which requires a standard everyone recognizes (I refer back to my example of Gaulish currency and British attempts to undermine colonial issued currency). If I give you a silver dollar (from when they were still actually silver) minted by the Denver Mint (my parents grew up in silver mining town and actually have a few of these left) you could be reasonably sure that the amount of silver was a certain percentage of silver. The standard created by the Treasury department also makes it easier for you to see if there were obvious signs of inconsistency congruent with possible forgery. It should also be mentioned that one of the largest weaknesses of the articles of Confederation and why they failed, was that it didn't create a centralized currency, therefore states printed their own currency. No one agreed on it's value. 13 separate currencies made forgery easier, and harder to detect. This lead to interstate trade grinding to a halt. It also severely limited foreign trade.
Money was invented because it created an agreed upon value which facilitates both domestic and international trade. The reason we gave this power to the government is because, like defense, it's more efficient to have one centralized and uniform currency than everyone having their own private currency. Yes, you can use systems like barter or specie, but those tend to limit domestic and foreign trade. Currency tended to appear about the same time as cultures advanced from simple tribal systems into complex systems with more disperse and varied industries. So about the same time as farming began to appear (agronomy based cultures developed currency before pastoral systems). Yes, some companies have created trade currencies, usually in an area they had a virtual monopoly on trade, and yes some of these became nearly as commonly used as legal tender, but only in the areas controlled or immediately adjacent to their monopolies. They also tended to be much less stable over the long term. They also tended to use trade currency to keep workers in a state of near constant indentured servitude. See how company issued currency worked in factory towns. Pay your workers or miners in company script only, which means they have to buy from the company store, live in company housing etc. Many mining companies did exactly this in the late 19th century in America, which led to the workers rights movement and contributed to the rise of the progressive movement.
So, given the history of decentralized currency and or private party currency, it was historically unstable, hampered trade, and led to tyrannical manipulation, oh and contributed to the rise of collectivists ideologies. But hey that sure sounds libertarian to me.
The advantage of bitcoin was supposed to be that you could instantly verify all the transactions so you would know where all the money was. So what happened to all the crypto that disappeared from FTX?
It got cashed out and spent long ago. But exchange transactions aren't on-chain, so you need access to the FTX logs.
As the Tom Brady Youtube ads for FTX said, "the most trusted way to trade crypto".
It would have been interesting to read somewhere in this article what constitutes cryptographic proof of a transaction and how the investors in FTX could have known instead of simply trusting SBF.
Even after reading this, im not understanding why the world "needs" bitcoin.
Because they are more anarchists or at best minarchists rather than libertarian and they also seem lacking a strong basis in macroeconomics, history and anthropology. We've tried non-government currency and or decentralized currency, and the results actually were worse than government issued currency. Governments really have only a few functions, provide for the common defense and standardize and regulate currency are two of the top (BTW, one of the big reasons to regulate and standardize currency is to pay your troops and provide equipment, rations and uniforms, usually from third parties, and it's helpful if those vendors and you can agree to a common form of exchange). We may not think of how important a stable currency is for national defense, but almost from the start of complex societies, forging your opponents currency, devaluing it has been a popular strategy. During WW2 all major powers were utilized this to some degree.
It appears to just be based on say-so and vapor. Thus, for this here Skeptic, I say Hell to the no! And have fun as somebody’s Maytag in prison, SBF!
I don't think the federal government should have to many powers but the two I do think they should have (and they're more closely related than people realize) is to provide for the common defense and standardization and regulation of currency. The whole decentralized and or private currency things been tried quite frequently in history and has never been successful, stable, beneficial to free trade or led to more liberty (rather, history shows it tends to result in less liberty and hindered, heavily regulated or controlled trade). Private currency is just slightly more effective than a strictly barter system, which is slightly better than a communal system. Pretty much as soon as a culture begins to move beyond simple tribalism, they create some form of currency, controlled by some form of authority. I know that makes some libertarians uneasy, but, it's pretty standard and almost universally necessary as societies became complex, settled, agrarian, multi-industrial cultures. Creation of government standardized currency also went hand in hand with standardized weights and measures, which is also far more beneficial for trade than decentralized weights and measures. It's much better for both of us in the long run if I offer to trade you three bushels of wheat for a bronze dagger you smithed, if we both agree on (or someone else set) what exactly a bushel of wheat is. It's pretty handy having everyone agree on how much a kg weighs, what volume a liter is, etc makes trade a lot easier.
And no, it isn't necessary for this agreement to be government driven, but whenever it's not been, historically it didn't failed, usually in rather dramatic fashion.
Edit it didn't only fail but failed in rather dramatic fashion.
You are correct that government setting standards of weights and measure and a commonly-accepted currency both protect and facilitate free enterprise and free trade.
However, government sets standards of weight and measure without monopolizing the manufacture of scales, rulers, cash registers, thermometers, Geiger Counters, etc.
By the same token (so to speak,) couldn’t government set the standard of currency based only in precious Metals or commodities while multiple private providers mint the currency?
If government monopolized the actual manufacture of the currency, what is to stop government from issuing it’s own pinky-swear, vaporware currency? Indeed, didn’t government-printed fiat paper currency enable governments throughout history to finance Welfare and Warfare States without direct and explicit confiscation?
It is not without reason that Thomas Jefferson held that “Central Banks are more dangerous than standing armies.” Government needs limitation to a protector of Free-Market Capitalism, not a participant.
I'm not understanding why "trust is everything", when the exact problem here was that people trusted this bozo, and the purported goal of digital currency is just exactly a system that DOESN'T rely on trust.
What idiot wrote that headline?
Yeah the whole point is that you don't have to trust scammers like SBF.
I am now making $19k or more every month from home by doing very simple and easy job online from home. I have received exactly $20845 last month from this home job. Join now this job and start making cash online by
Follow instruction on website Here...............>>> onlinecareer1
Effective altruism vs. capitalism. In one, people move money, real and pretend, around but produce nothing, and fund nothing. At the end, they might give bushels of money to poor people, who can then buy...nothing. In the other, people move money around as investment and reward for making stuff. Along the way, poor people, at least those who work, get a share of the stuff.
Which world do you want to live in?
I'm with you except for this:
" ... they might give bushels of money to poor people, who can then buy…nothing. "
In fact, SBF gave bushels of money to democrats to indirectly buy the presidency - that seems like something pretty dam important to me!!
The reason exchanges and stable coins are necessary in crypto is because there just ain't much real world transactions of crypto.
After reading some libertarians defending crypto and ranked choice voting (despite it apparently showing little to no improvement over first past the goal) and the endless stories on how acting the spoiler candidate by getting low single digit percentages of voters is going to cause the parties to appeal to you any day now despite it never yet happening, (especially when you tend to hurt the party you have the most overlap with while almost universally helping the party that is the closest to being antithetical to you), that there tends to be a certain species of libertarian,who while well informed on many subjects, do ignore well known historical, sociological, anthropological concepts. They also tend to, while being cynical and pragmatic on a variety of other subjects, lack needed cynicism and pragmatism on these libertarian tropes. One of the reasons I do not identify as a libertarian anymore than I identify as a republican.
Ironically, the FTX meltdown is the best illustration yet of why the world needs bitcoin.
Just like the Great Depression was a great illustration of why the USA needed the Federal Reserve? (which was created to smooth out the business cycle and financial panics, not to create one big financial panic to rule them all....)
A very creative way to put it about The Federal Reserve.
If the Middle Earth Federal Reserve operated like ours, Hobbits would eat 22 meals a day instead of 11 off their Shire EBT Card, live in Section 8 Hobbit-Holes that would no longer mean comfort, and would be making dirty deals with Sauron and Smaug to try to get them to like Middle-Earthers. 🙂
A fool and his money are easily parted. Watching these collapses happen over and over and yet fools keep giving away their money has been humorous. “It’s different this time” is the motto of the fool.
Can major league baseball umpires remove the FTX patch from their umpire outfits, of will they need to get new umpire outfits?
I'm thinking that something like a thread ripper could be used to remove the FTX patch. As a consumer of major league baseball products, I hope that I'm not asked to pay for new umpire outfits without an FTX patch.
Instant collectable?