CRIME + TECHNOLOGY
The Rise And Fall Of Pseudo Tech Geniuses
We used to think they were pushing frontiers, we gave them too much credit
“I’m addicted to reading,” a journalist said to the erstwhile multibillionaire in a recently resurfaced interview. “Oh, yeah?” Sam Bankman-Fried replied. “I would never read a book.”
Fallen crypto king Sam Bankman-Fried (SBF) is in deep shit. Turns out he and his brain are full of it too.
I was introduced to cryptocurrency in 2019 by a friend. I felt then as I know now, it’s a Ponzi scam (Pundits who disagree, write your own spiel separately). Not because I’m smart and I figured it all out. The opposite, because I know shit about it.
It was because I had a lot of questions about it and my friend — plus several others who were in the crypto game — couldn’t provide me with straight answers. That’s as crooked and shady as it gets.
Now I’m no Commander Lexa or an Albatraoz (urban slang for bad ass bitch) when it comes to the CIA interrogation, but like anyone else, if you want me to put money somewhere promising me dividends, you just have to convince me why it’s worth my time and my money. Explain like you would to a five-year-old how it works. That’s all really (especially if you plan to make a commission cut as a portfolio manager, answer my damn questions).
I’m not easily lured into money-making schemes but I am extremely vested in understanding the scheme of things, and I will knock your tower down if I have to. It happened with friends with MLM, the pyramid bullshit nonsense, unit trust funds, and then the season of crypto and NFTs. These are the reasons why I avoid meeting friends who suddenly appear out of nowhere with a suspicious keenness to say hello. I prefer to remain ghosted, thanks.
So when SBF and his company FTX folded, there I stood with my arms folded with no surprise. Turns out that the founder and former CEO of the cryptocurrency exchange was another Elizabeth-Theranos psycho-pseudo Netflix special. Their effective bullshitting had run its course and their genuine ignorance had finally caught up with them.
There seems to be a running theme with a legion of so-called “American financial and tech geniuses”. If you notice they share age-range and background info. They’ve been buffed and enabled growing up skipping the harsh lessons in accountability.
From Jack Dorsey’s Twitter, Mark Zuckerberg’s Facebook, Elizabeth Holmes’ Theranos, Travic Kalanick’s Uber, Adam Neumann’s WeWork to Sam Bankman-Fried’s FTX, these “startup whiz kids” were simply lucky to have been where they were when they were.
I’d throw Elon Musk into the equation, but we ought to be like Charles Darwin and examine the other sharks swimming in the same waters. The species do not thrive in isolation nor are they a genetic anomaly. They’re a product of cultivation and modern invention.
It may sound like a broad brush stroke, but these geniuses happen to also be the beneficiaries of a boom time when little in the way of oversight was thought necessary.
The other limitations these financial legends share is their poor understanding of repercussions, weak judgement calls and human relatability. These make them callous, disassociated from reality, and jarred on social relatability. In abnormal psychology those are characteristics of social psychopaths.
Facebook for instance, is good at technically connecting billions of people around the world. Zuckerberg however, seems to have zero idea on the kinds of issues that sort of power can bring about. From censorship, filter bubble manipulation to complicity in crime, Facebook is a moral disaster of epic proportions.
But, they also serve as powerful cautionary tales to us all. We may not have their bank account. We may be small people compared to them and the mighty socialites they hang around with, but that doesn’t mean our brain has to be as reduced.
What bothers me a lot is when folks condemn them as greedy capitalists without deepening the curiosity to understand why there seems to be a recurring theme in the way they are able to manipulate their way through society and into our daily share of news and chatter.
You need to remember, these folks have an effect on the stock exchange. And when the graph plummets, companies are in peril, departments fold and people lose jobs. So yes, it affects you and me whether you want to admit it or not.
It is all economics, and the basics of economics is stability. These self-proclaimed smart asses are causing damaging ruckus that requires long-term recovery, and there will be sectors and certain quarters traumatized by its aftershocks.
It’s the same when online citizens scream foul about these capitalists eating off everyone and just being at that — staying angry.
You need to have a solid reason to at least explain why these people piss you off other than they’re “capitalists” and “entitled”. Come on, that makes us look just as clueless and bad as them. That’s why the younger generation are angry at … everything.
My students used to debate in class saying you don’t need a college degree to succeed in life using these whizz-kids as examples. I find myself in a quandary because it’s the same when I face their parents who preach science (STEM) over arts.
By definition, a STEM course is one that focuses on the integrated disciplines of science, technology, engineering, and math (hence the abbreviation for STEM). These teachings are typically carried out through hands-on learning and projects rooted in real world challenges to help prepare students for a degree and the future job landscape — so to speak.
But what arts, humanities and tertiary level education reading do provide are the critical skills to understand and manage people.
Dealing with people involves psychology (understanding oneself), sociology (understanding our relationship with others), anthropology (our ancestral-genetic makeup), history and philosophy (the theoretical framework of how societies operate).
From all of these we can understand and develop empathy, connection, build relationships, sense manipulation, overcome fears and limitations, form negotiations skills. All of these determine our survival skills and intellectual acumen.
From a legal standpoint, these people are no more than crooks and fraudsters.
According to criminal law (I’m referring to the British legal system which may deviate slightly from the U.S.) the Fraud Act 2006 states a common element showcased by people like Holmes and SBF (I’d throw in Zuckerberg and Neumann) is deception itself.
Deceiving is inducing a person to believe that a thing is true which is false, and which the person practicing the deceit knows or believes to be false. The deception could be as to fact, law, or intention. It could be expressed, implied or by conduct. The nub of the matter was the intentional or reckless creation of a false impression, whether by words or deeds (Criminal Law, 2017).
The Theft Act 1968 included three offenses largely designed to cover different forms of company fraud, such as false accounting, the making of false statements by company directors, and suppression of documents (Criminal Law, 2017).
I do suspect to a large extent these individuals are masterminds of their schemes, and that they’re just feigning ignorance.
Not so sure about Musk as these days his erratic behavior seems to display utter incompetency beyond lapses of impulsive decisions. Perhaps he realized the gravitas of Twitter lies in the fact that it deals with people and human rapid responses, something he wasn’t exposed to dealing with the technology behind SpaceX and Tesla. Humans are definitely not rockets and cars, Elon Musk.
Why do you think people described Zuckerberg and Holmes in court as cold and lizard-like? Why is SBF so aloof and without remorse despite the FTX epic failure? Why is Musk a man completely detached from reality? Why are these so-called geniuses flippant in their answers, indecisive and numbed from the damage they had caused? Why are they described as difficult to be understood and to work with?
Once we were too kind and generous by saying geniuses like these can only work alone. The truth of the matter is, they’re so stunted with developmental skills that they don’t know how to share, communicate and connect with anyone else. This stunted knowledge includes the inability to learn, unlearn, relearn, ask for help, collaborate and cooperate. Holmes, SBF and Musk I’d consider as social psychopaths.
They’re talkers not listeners. Stubborn due to arrogance and at their executive level, have no idea on tactics, and understanding of what other people have done in similar tactical situations and whether it worked.
Sure, they’re rebels and renegades, pushing the frontiers of innovations. They’re like party and wedding crashers.
This would be better if the collateral damages are low and not at the expense of innocent employees who really need to depend on jobs, depend on insurance for disability, have families to feed, and are really into their work because they genuinely believe in improving societies, not for personal glorification.
So yeah, Sam Bankman-Fried, perhaps you should start reading a book.
