The FTX Future Fund team has resigned - EA Forum
Comment by Kerry_Vaughan - I want to clarify the claims I'm making in the Twitter thread. I am not claiming that EA leadership or members of the FTX Future fund knew Sam was engaging in fraudulent behavior while they were working at FTX Future Fund. Instead, I am saying that friends of mine in the EA community worked at Alameda Research during the first 6 months of its existence. At the end of that period, many of them suddenly left all at once. In talking about this with people involved, my impression is: 1) The majority of staff at Alameda were unhappy with Sam's leadership of the company. Their concerns about Sam included concerns about him taking extreme and unnecessary risks and losing large amounts of money, poor safeguards around moving money around, poor capital controls, including a lack of distinction between money owned by investors and money owned by Alameda itself, and Sam generally being extremely difficult to work with. 2) The legal ownership structure of Alameda did not reflect the ownership structure that had been agreed to by the parties involved. In particular, Sam registered Alameda under his sole ownership and not as jointly owned by him and his cofounders. This was not thought to be a problem because everyone trusted each other as EAs. 3) Eventually, the conflict got serious enough that a large cohort of people decided to quit all at once. Sam refused to honor the agreed ownership structure of Alameda and used his legal ownership to screw people out of their rightful ownership stake in Alameda Research. 4) Several high-ranking and well-respected members of the EA community with more familiarity with the situation believed that Sam had behaved unethically in his handling of the situation. I heard this from multiple sources personally. 5) I believe the basic information above circulated widely among EA leadership and was known to some members of FTX Future Fund. A person who did work at Alameda during this period described Sam's behavior as follows: Additionally,
Sharmake 3y 141 38 8 What do EA and the FTX Future Team think of a claim by Kerry Vaughan that Sam Bankman-Fried did severely unethical behavior before and EA and FTX covered it up and laundered his reputation, effectively getting away with it. I'm posting because of true, this suggests big changes to EA norms are necessary to deal with bad actors like him, and that Sam Bankman-Fried should be outright banned from the forum and EA events. Link to tweets here: https://twitter.com/KerryLVaughan/status/1590807597011333120 Reply
Explore this link on the map →related reading
- Doing EA Better — EA Forumforum.effectivealtruism.org
- Interview: Fallen crypto CEO Sam Bankman-Fried opens up about FTX, Alameda Research, and his regrets | Voxvox.com
- Will @Austin’s ‘In defense of SBF’ have aged well? [resolves to poll] | Manifoldmanifold.markets
- Women and Effective Altruism · keerthanapgkeerthanapg.com
- Effective altruism is better off without Sam Bankman-Fried.slate.com
- In Defense of SBF | Manifoldmanifold.markets
- Money Stuff: FTX Might Have Found Some Money | NewsletterHuntnewsletterhunt.com
- Taking ethics seriously, and enjoying the process — EA Forumforum.effectivealtruism.org
- The Deaths of Effective Altruism | WIREDwired.com
- Sam Bankman-Fried - Wikipediaen.wikipedia.org
- To Infinity and Back - by Max Nussenbaumcandyforbreakfast.email
- Michael Lewis’s Big Contrarian Bet | The New Yorkernewyorker.com