Really appreciate you taking the time to write out such a detailed response. It does seem that I stepped into a conversation that was bigger and longer-running than I’d realized.
I see a lot better where you are coming from, now. And certainly there are plenty of Austin’s takes here that I disagree with (e.g., I don’t think we should free SBF and put him to work).
Still, some of your claims about what Austin would do in various hypotheticals are a bit hard for me to square with the person I’m seeing Austin to be. Austin’s post specifically called out that Caroline was repentant and had fully served her time in prison as a reason why it was permissible to hire her. Maybe that paragraph was only included instrumentally, and it wasn’t actually a crux for Austin. In that case, I disagree with him—I do strongly agree it would be wrong to hire a hypothetical pardoned-SBF for the same role Caroline was hired for now. It’s relevant that she’s contrite, and that she explained her crimes in gruesome detail for the world to know, while Sam did the opposite.
So—fine, I grant Austin has or has had some number of bad takes. I’ve had bad takes too. I still see him as having one unpopular good take now, which is that 2026-Caroline would be a good hire. One of the main reasons I admire you so much, Oliver, is that you had an unpopular good take too (that FTX was bad/sketchy, a take you importantly held before its crimes were brought to light).
>I think Austin is like 90th percentile likely among people I know to e.g. end up doing something as dumb as investing Manifund funds earmarked for specific projects into volatile assets and then end up not being able to pay out promised grants.
This exchange is making me realize that I don’t really know any of you guys all that well, besides for Caroline, and maybe I shouldn’t have waded into this. But… are you saying Austin would do this without consent? You really think Austin would commit some kind of FTX-style fraudulent scheme where user assets get nonconsensually invested into risky investment vehicles? That just… still doesn’t seem like his apparent personality type, to me, at all. And if that was his plan, Caroline would be the worst possible hire. Not only because of increased scrutiny, but also because I’d expect she herself will be severely allergic to any kind of impropriety in any role she takes on for the rest of her life.
Of course, that’s just my judgment. And it’s fair if you want to be like, “well, Adam publicly endorsed Sam in 2021, so his judgment sucks.” Nevertheless, I think I am a better judge of character than I was in 2021 (though I admit that I have nothing I can point to to convince anyone here), and I disagree with the consensus view in this thread that 2026-Caroline would be likelier than most to commit fraud in her role at Manifund. I’m happy to throw whatever nonexistent social capital I have here behind that.
I see a lot better where you are coming from, now. And certainly there are plenty of Austin’s takes here that I disagree with (e.g., I don’t think we should free SBF and put him to work).
Glad I made at least some sense!
This exchange is making me realize that I don’t really know any of you guys all that well, besides for Caroline, and maybe I shouldn’t have waded into this. But… are you saying Austin would do this without consent? You really think Austin would commit some kind of FTX-style fraudulent scheme where user assets get nonconsensually invested into risky investment vehicles? That just… still doesn’t seem like his apparent personality type, to me, at all. And if that was his plan, Caroline would be the worst possible hire. Not only because of increased scrutiny, but also because I’d expect she herself will be severely allergic to any kind of impropriety in any role she takes on for the rest of her life.
I am saying Austin is in my 90th percentile for people likely to do this. I think this still leaves him unlikely to do this, but yeah, I am tracking it as a risk that seems higher for him than most people.
Caroline would be the worst possible hire
I don’t know Caroline well. In general the history of financial fraud strongly suggests that people who previously committed financial fraud have a much higher likelihood of doing so again. You might have special information about Caroline that I do not have that give you appropriate confidence that this base-rate doesn’t apply to Caroline, but it’s at least not clear to me, from where I am standing.
Of course, that’s just my judgment. And it’s fair if you want to be like, “well, Adam publicly endorsed Sam in 2021, so his judgment sucks.” Nevertheless, I think I am a better judge of character than I was in 2021 (though I admit that I have nothing I can point to to convince anyone here), and I disagree with the consensus view in this thread that 2026-Caroline would be likelier than most to commit fraud in her role at Manifund. I’m happy to throw whatever nonexistent social capital I have here behind that.
I appreciate you sharing your take, I do think it’s valuable evidence. I do discount it a good amount given your mixed track record, but not completely.
Really appreciate you taking the time to write out such a detailed response. It does seem that I stepped into a conversation that was bigger and longer-running than I’d realized.
I see a lot better where you are coming from, now. And certainly there are plenty of Austin’s takes here that I disagree with (e.g., I don’t think we should free SBF and put him to work).
Still, some of your claims about what Austin would do in various hypotheticals are a bit hard for me to square with the person I’m seeing Austin to be. Austin’s post specifically called out that Caroline was repentant and had fully served her time in prison as a reason why it was permissible to hire her. Maybe that paragraph was only included instrumentally, and it wasn’t actually a crux for Austin. In that case, I disagree with him—I do strongly agree it would be wrong to hire a hypothetical pardoned-SBF for the same role Caroline was hired for now. It’s relevant that she’s contrite, and that she explained her crimes in gruesome detail for the world to know, while Sam did the opposite.
So—fine, I grant Austin has or has had some number of bad takes. I’ve had bad takes too. I still see him as having one unpopular good take now, which is that 2026-Caroline would be a good hire. One of the main reasons I admire you so much, Oliver, is that you had an unpopular good take too (that FTX was bad/sketchy, a take you importantly held before its crimes were brought to light).
>I think Austin is like 90th percentile likely among people I know to e.g. end up doing something as dumb as investing Manifund funds earmarked for specific projects into volatile assets and then end up not being able to pay out promised grants.
This exchange is making me realize that I don’t really know any of you guys all that well, besides for Caroline, and maybe I shouldn’t have waded into this. But… are you saying Austin would do this without consent? You really think Austin would commit some kind of FTX-style fraudulent scheme where user assets get nonconsensually invested into risky investment vehicles? That just… still doesn’t seem like his apparent personality type, to me, at all. And if that was his plan, Caroline would be the worst possible hire. Not only because of increased scrutiny, but also because I’d expect she herself will be severely allergic to any kind of impropriety in any role she takes on for the rest of her life.
Of course, that’s just my judgment. And it’s fair if you want to be like, “well, Adam publicly endorsed Sam in 2021, so his judgment sucks.” Nevertheless, I think I am a better judge of character than I was in 2021 (though I admit that I have nothing I can point to to convince anyone here), and I disagree with the consensus view in this thread that 2026-Caroline would be likelier than most to commit fraud in her role at Manifund. I’m happy to throw whatever nonexistent social capital I have here behind that.
Glad I made at least some sense!
I am saying Austin is in my 90th percentile for people likely to do this. I think this still leaves him unlikely to do this, but yeah, I am tracking it as a risk that seems higher for him than most people.
I don’t know Caroline well. In general the history of financial fraud strongly suggests that people who previously committed financial fraud have a much higher likelihood of doing so again. You might have special information about Caroline that I do not have that give you appropriate confidence that this base-rate doesn’t apply to Caroline, but it’s at least not clear to me, from where I am standing.
I appreciate you sharing your take, I do think it’s valuable evidence. I do discount it a good amount given your mixed track record, but not completely.