Katie is being masterful interviewer here. Straight but non confrontational. So it sounds like just conversations but the questions drive the discussion.
Katie, do you know about the book, "The Sociopath Next Door"? The author, who is a therapist and researcher says that a conscience is not necessarily something a person is born with. Such people learn what to say in certain emotional situations because they observe how others behave. They know they don't feel what others feel when others act according to their conscience. It's a fascinating concept-I am pretty sure Sam is missing a conscience. Thanks for this discussion.
@@DemocracyFirst2025 How do you explain the study on Ivermectin which claims it is ineffective against Covid19 was funded by SBF? BTW, there's a book on Amazon that chronicles how it saved millions worldwide!
@@DemocracyFirst2025I don’t really agree with that therapists concept of a conscience in general, however, regarding your comment I would just pose a question… that is, what is the point of owning the world if it’s on fire? He was willing to do some good stuff, as long as the foundations were constructed in such a way that he is benefiting from it the most. He could have done some great stuff to help people, but he was fundamentally helping himself which is why this happened
@@DemocracyFirst2025 He wasn't interested in any personal altruism. It was a game. While in college, he was presented with an idea of something that hadn't been done and he grabbed it as a game that he could build/play. He was/is a game-player to the extent that he played games while on business calls. The idea of consequences never entered his mind. I wonder whether he ever had to suffer consequences for any childhood misbehaviors.
I've watched several of Michael Lewis's interviews, including the 60 Minutes segment. But the most telling one is his interview in "Booked Up with Jen Taub" podcast. The host is Jennifer Taub, a former lawyer and Harvard & Yale graduate who currently works as a law professor. In the interview they briefly discussed Jeffrey MacDonald vs Joe McGinniss case. McGinniss is the writer of Fatal Vision, a book based on a true crime story where MacDonald was accused of killing his family. In the middle of writing the book, McGinnis concluded that MacDonald was guilty, even though the trial had not finished yet. MacDonald gave permission to McGinnis to write the book and have him access to his belonging, interviewing him, etc. But McGinnis didn't keep his mouth shut. He published his conclusion that MacDonald was guilty, and MacDonald sued him because of it. The case was settled out of court, implied that McGinnis had to pay a significant amount of money to MacDonald. In the interview, Jennifer Taub also mentioned that as a former lawyer, she could see a lot of red flags (she mentioned them as 'breadcrumbs') in the book, which lead her to make a conclusion, although there is no conclusion clearly stated in the book. In an episode of 'Judging Sam' (a Pushkin Industries podcast), Matt Levine, the famous Bloomberg columnist, also mentioned that he was more convinced that SBF was guilty after reading the book. Based on the above, I think Michael actually thought SBF was a fraudster. The most telling clue is that Michael only invested a relatively small amount of his personal fortune in FTX (only $2,000), a clear sign that he didn't believe in the business. However, because he was given access by SBF and does not have a concrete proof, he couldn't disclose his conclusion without risking being sued. Michael knew this limitation since the very beginning, but he was willing to bear it in exchange of an access to SBF life, which no other people could have. As a consequence, he could only use one perspective in writing the book: the perspectcive of an observer. And he did just that.
If you believe that you're as big a mark as mr Lewis is. he's clearly stated he does not believe SBF meant to defraud anyone, and that he did not believe that the prosecution would be able to prove intent. You're wishcasting about shit the man has spoken very clearly about, and it's real weird
@@amafi_poe What Michael Lewis meant is he didn't believe that SBF had the ultimate purpose of taking people's money then running away with it. Lewis said SBF really believed in effective altruism, a.k.a 'getting rich to help other people'. Several other journalists who have interviewed SBF and have been covering his trial also believe so. To understand SBF's personality, we have to find similar examples who are more familiar to the general public. The closest examples I could find are televangelists and Thanos of the Marvel Cinematic Universe. a) Televangelists Like a lot of televangelists, SBF believe in greater good for humanity. And like those televangelists, SBF believe he is entitled to enjoy some of the money as the payment of his 'effort' to help the humanity. b) Thanos Like Thanos, SBF believe in achieving 'the greater good' by all means necessary. For Thanos, killing half of the living beings in the universe is justified to create a better world. For SBF, 'borrowing' his customers' funds illegally and lying to cover it up is justified to access more wealth so he could help more people. In summary, Michael Lewis believes that SBF did not have ill intention at the beginning of his venture. Instead, he believes SBF had a narcissistic personality and a distorted grandiose view about himself, which I think is true. It doesn't mean SBF is classified as a good person, though. After all, we still brand Thanos as a villain, despite his 'noble' purpose. From Michael Lewis' perspective, you could see why he was so excited about this project, that he was willing to take the risk of writing a controversial book. He found his own Thanos.
Lewis ruined his reputation with this book. Did he get a big payoff from SBF? Lewis knows that this guy raided customer funds and fired them off on a myriad of things. What the hell?
@@tiararoxeanne1318 He finished writing the book after SBF was arrested and charged. SBF was exposed as a liar during his "speaking tour". Lewis is not a stupid person. Yet he decided to write a book about SBF but fails to focus on the fact that Lewis was a witness to one of the biggest scams in history. He claims his son inspired to write this from a different perspective. What???He now says that maybe he'll write another shorter book about the "aftermath" and the trial. Huh? It's pretty awful and hopefully someone will write the inside story one day.
SBF needs to be a background employee. He does not have the ability to run a business especially a trading firm. He is brilliant but let’s not sugar coat this, he knew what he was doing, he’s too arrogant to think that he was going to get caught.
Listening the story of SBF childhood makes me realize: SBF is what Sheldon would probably be if he was raised by Leonard's parents (The Big Bang Theory)🤯
Lewis used to be one of my favourite writers but I had to do a 180 after his insane defence of SBF It was hard to watch and made me question the accuracy of every single book of his that I had read. Never reading anything of his ever again. What a joke.
If Michael Lewis were to interview me (unlikely, but if pigs had wings....) then I would be fascinated to learn more about his own character. I remember from his book about Liar's Poker and big swinging dicks how he briefly described his own foray into the world of 'fake' money before he signed out and became a writer... a strange metamorphosis!
SBF exhibits many traits that are consistent with the diagnosis of psychopathy: lack of conscience or sense of guilt, lack of empathy, egocentricity, repeated violations of social norms, shallow emotions, and disregard of the law.
Oh there is because he was allowed to function in this unregulated financial area, which isn't his fault, that's the fault of the American SEC, from what little I've heard of this discussion, his condition, if he was to go for it would be diagnosed as very high functioning on the autistic spectrum. He has no empathy with people and so losing people's life savings means very little if nothing to him because he can't feel what's that like. So when or if he is found guilty he will not understand what he has been found guilty for. I'm sorry, but the American financial unregulated system has allowed him to get away with this.
@@johnbascom4523💯agree. I think the purpose of his hefty donations to both parties were to keep crypto currencies being unregulated. If you were a politician, it's the easiest thing to do: getting paid for NOT doing your job, or at least doing it very slowly.
He gave ~$140 million towards effective altruism (for reference he paid $200M to name his favourite e-sports team "FTX TSM") - so yes, but it seemed to me more like a PR play than true interest
Modern version of Wall Street/Den of Thieves almost 40 years after: Changpeng Zhao is Gordon Gekko (Ian Boesky) and SBF is Budd Fox/(Michel Milken, It is funny how we got a nerdy empowered Ellison instead a sexy Darien Taylor). Not only greed is good, it is a den of complicity among influencers, sportst stars, actors, media, Political parties, authorities, regulators and every body who can´t see how this is the same era of speculative way of making rich, only with a new brand philosopher MacAskill and fool of psicological theories to justify criminal behavior covering a deep admiration to their god: $.
“Most people who got this rich had to do dig up oil, build railroads, build companies, really work… sbf didn’t have to stoop to such levels to get so rich, what a genius”. Lmao all he had to do was just catch money as people threw it at him
That should be SBF's defence that he is on the Autistic spectrum and he has a lack of empathy when it comes to communicating with people. So, as Michael talks about his naturing its quiet clear that at a young age he had some sort of mental emotional condition that no one picked up on and he was allowed to develop in this isolated way and left to his own devices.
If I were a jury or a judge, that defense means nothing. He was capable to differentiate right vs wrong, and know what was what. Just because he couldn't feel doesn't mean he couldn't think. If that defense was allowed then we should let Harvey Weinstein or Bill Cosby out of jail, because they clearly couldn't feel the misery of their victims🙄
It sounds like the "spectrum" at play here is the narcissistic spectrum. If you're getting major autism vibes from someone who doesn't have an intellectual disability or hx of psychosis & who doesn't meet key diagnostic criteria for ASD, it's likely that what you're picking up on is pathological narcissism (of a more cerebral type).
I think that Lewis said that SBF never asked any question about Lewis himself. Maybe SBF was only interested in himself and didn't care about any other people really.
Hi Katie - I looked you up on Wikipedia and I got a positive impression of who you are. That's why I feel that you shouldn't have offered your condolences to Michael Lewis for the loss of his daughter online. That should have been private....
Katie Couric is an iconic journalist trusted by hundreds of millions of people. Trusted journalists responsibly reveal truths and enlighten us; in some situations condolences should be private. In this situation, her public condolences serve the greater good of her friend Michael and us as viewers (in our better understanding of the author).
This was a good interview until the end which really made me cringe. Why did you feel the need to express your condolences publicly? It felt so gratuitous, like you were looking for an emotional reaction from Mr Lewis. Your expression of sympathy could have been done personally and privately after the cameras stopped rolling if it were truly genuine and not for the sake of sensationalism. His daughter died 3 years ago so plenty of time for expressions of sympathy that need not have been public on your part. Really made me uncomfortable. Hopefully it didn't make Mr Lewis too uncomfortable.
Katy, you should hold your legs together. It looks manly when you sit like that. I like the pink though. Also, I would avoid the spike heels. Maybe 2 inch max for heels.
Excellent, informative and interesting interview. Thanks. I’ve been curious about SNF and you’ve brought a lot of answers. You had me tears with your tender comments at the end. Again, thanks.
So much cynicism and judgment in these comments, being cast on all the subjects participating in or focused on, in this fantastic interview. I was hanging on every word. Katie’s questions were all better and smarter than the ones I had in my head. Michael’s answers were equally good. Just an outstanding video from start to heartfelt finish. Thank you both.
There is very little cynicism and judgement in these comments. Almost all of them are the same sort of sappy adulation as yours. Katie's continual interruptions are annoying and often wildly irrelevant. Her continual ignorant gabble from 30:30 to around 33:30 is oddly ironic in that she starts the spew by saying, quite correctly, that she doesn't understand what Lewis is saying with perfect clarity, and then as he tries to straighten her out she keeps interrupting to make any explanation impossible.
Sam may have wanted there to be a Sam just like everyone else...48:00...But I doubt he can find him...No one else has been able to, and he has shown that even though he wants to be different, against his best efforts, he has turned out to not to be...yet...
I met this funny man....we went for coffee about 30times(about 2hours each time) he gave me presents.....but he never asked me anything ever...i felt 1dimensional,
The only thing rhat the book, the alleged friendship ofthis author with SBF, and the state of the hundreds of irreguarilites that he, as a former snake salesman (bond salesman), prove, is that he is a snake looking for a story.A real friend would have rung alarm bells about the conflicts of interests, the comingling of funds. I sincerely think that if anybody could have mentored him and even his parents, since fhey dont know jack about running and exchange. broker dealer would be Michael Lewis. Instead, he was more interested in his story and book rather in the welfare of millions of investors
Celebrity love fest with SBF. No one seems to have had any any skepticism or subjected SBF to a critical analysis. It’s not SBF who is interesting, it’s the character of people who got on board. So “the emperor has no clothes”.
Morphing from planning to save kid's lives in Africa to saving the human race sounds a bit like Elon Musk. It would be interesting to see how Elon Musk and SBF would have related to each other if they had had contact (maybe they did have superficial contact -- about doge coin maybe or making the human race a multi-planet species?).
So, Katie misses the most interesting point...SBF is what happens when a person who might be human has no feeling of humanness, but senses that others do. And instead dives into his early family...disappointing, but to be expected...
Yes Michael your point about fundamentals, hi-tec has no fundamentals its all based on the internet and movement of information and so there is no tangible pieces of equipment, its all in people's brains.
This guy is probably the worst journalist I’ve ever seen. He probably could have made even more money too if he didn’t make it so obvious he has no journalistic integrity. He could have possibly been the ‘sbf guy’ but people don’t even care what he has to say bc what he’s said is absurd
Cryptocurrency is the internet bubble version 2.0 and it is going to last about a few years to a decade, because it runs on the GREED of people and willing to speculate on, well what exactly cryptocurrency is?
And until people can fully understand it real world application, the upside of this thing will be so ginormous that money will continue to flow into it.
![Should We Admire Sam Bankman-Fried and FTX? - Michael Lewis [Part II] | Intelligence Squared](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/0ADdzHCGjCI/mqdefault.jpg)
![Should We Admire Sam Bankman-Fried and FTX? - Michael Lewis [Part II] | Intelligence Squared](/img/tr.png)
Katie is being masterful interviewer here. Straight but non confrontational. So it sounds like just conversations but the questions drive the discussion.
Katie, do you know about the book, "The Sociopath Next Door"? The author, who is a therapist and researcher says that a conscience is not necessarily something a person is born with. Such people learn what to say in certain emotional situations because they observe how others behave. They know they don't feel what others feel when others act according to their conscience. It's a fascinating concept-I am pretty sure Sam is missing a conscience. Thanks for this discussion.
How do you explain his desire to do as much good as mathematically possible for humanity, if he’s missing a conscience?
x paths dont exist
@@DemocracyFirst2025 How do you explain the study on Ivermectin which claims it is ineffective against Covid19 was funded by SBF? BTW, there's a book on Amazon that chronicles how it saved millions worldwide!
@@DemocracyFirst2025I don’t really agree with that therapists concept of a conscience in general, however, regarding your comment I would just pose a question… that is, what is the point of owning the world if it’s on fire? He was willing to do some good stuff, as long as the foundations were constructed in such a way that he is benefiting from it the most. He could have done some great stuff to help people, but he was fundamentally helping himself which is why this happened
@@DemocracyFirst2025 He wasn't interested in any personal altruism. It was a game. While in college, he was presented with an idea of something that hadn't been done and he grabbed it as a game that he could build/play. He was/is a game-player to the extent that he played games while on business calls. The idea of consequences never entered his mind. I wonder whether he ever had to suffer consequences for any childhood misbehaviors.
I've watched several of Michael Lewis's interviews, including the 60 Minutes segment. But the most telling one is his interview in "Booked Up with Jen Taub" podcast. The host is Jennifer Taub, a former lawyer and Harvard & Yale graduate who currently works as a law professor.
In the interview they briefly discussed Jeffrey MacDonald vs Joe McGinniss case. McGinniss is the writer of Fatal Vision, a book based on a true crime story where MacDonald was accused of killing his family. In the middle of writing the book, McGinnis concluded that MacDonald was guilty, even though the trial had not finished yet. MacDonald gave permission to McGinnis to write the book and have him access to his belonging, interviewing him, etc. But McGinnis didn't keep his mouth shut. He published his conclusion that MacDonald was guilty, and MacDonald sued him because of it. The case was settled out of court, implied that McGinnis had to pay a significant amount of money to MacDonald.
In the interview, Jennifer Taub also mentioned that as a former lawyer, she could see a lot of red flags (she mentioned them as 'breadcrumbs') in the book, which lead her to make a conclusion, although there is no conclusion clearly stated in the book. In an episode of 'Judging Sam' (a Pushkin Industries podcast), Matt Levine, the famous Bloomberg columnist, also mentioned that he was more convinced that SBF was guilty after reading the book.
Based on the above, I think Michael actually thought SBF was a fraudster. The most telling clue is that Michael only invested a relatively small amount of his personal fortune in FTX (only $2,000), a clear sign that he didn't believe in the business. However, because he was given access by SBF and does not have a concrete proof, he couldn't disclose his conclusion without risking being sued.
Michael knew this limitation since the very beginning, but he was willing to bear it in exchange of an access to SBF life, which no other people could have. As a consequence, he could only use one perspective in writing the book: the perspectcive of an observer. And he did just that.
If you believe that you're as big a mark as mr Lewis is. he's clearly stated he does not believe SBF meant to defraud anyone, and that he did not believe that the prosecution would be able to prove intent. You're wishcasting about shit the man has spoken very clearly about, and it's real weird
@@amafi_poe What Michael Lewis meant is he didn't believe that SBF had the ultimate purpose of taking people's money then running away with it. Lewis said SBF really believed in effective altruism, a.k.a 'getting rich to help other people'. Several other journalists who have interviewed SBF and have been covering his trial also believe so. To understand SBF's personality, we have to find similar examples who are more familiar to the general public. The closest examples I could find are televangelists and Thanos of the Marvel Cinematic Universe.
a) Televangelists
Like a lot of televangelists, SBF believe in greater good for humanity. And like those televangelists, SBF believe he is entitled to enjoy some of the money as the payment of his 'effort' to help the humanity.
b) Thanos
Like Thanos, SBF believe in achieving 'the greater good' by all means necessary. For Thanos, killing half of the living beings in the universe is justified to create a better world. For SBF, 'borrowing' his customers' funds illegally and lying to cover it up is justified to access more wealth so he could help more people.
In summary, Michael Lewis believes that SBF did not have ill intention at the beginning of his venture. Instead, he believes SBF had a narcissistic personality and a distorted grandiose view about himself, which I think is true. It doesn't mean SBF is classified as a good person, though. After all, we still brand Thanos as a villain, despite his 'noble' purpose.
From Michael Lewis' perspective, you could see why he was so excited about this project, that he was willing to take the risk of writing a controversial book. He found his own Thanos.
Lewis ruined his reputation with this book. Did he get a big payoff from SBF? Lewis knows that this guy raided customer funds and fired them off on a myriad of things. What the hell?
@@acefromspace2727 How did you conclude that Lewis knew SBF had raided the customers' fund? Which part of the video made you think so?
@@tiararoxeanne1318 He finished writing the book after SBF was arrested and charged. SBF was exposed as a liar during his "speaking tour". Lewis is not a stupid person. Yet he decided to write a book about SBF but fails to focus on the fact that Lewis was a witness to one of the biggest scams in history. He claims his son inspired to write this from a different perspective. What???He now says that maybe he'll write another shorter book about the "aftermath" and the trial. Huh? It's pretty awful and hopefully someone will write the inside story one day.
SBF needs to be a background employee. He does not have the ability to run a business especially a trading firm. He is brilliant but let’s not sugar coat this, he knew what he was doing, he’s too arrogant to think that he was going to get caught.
Listening the story of SBF childhood makes me realize: SBF is what Sheldon would probably be if he was raised by Leonard's parents (The Big Bang Theory)🤯
Lewis used to be one of my favourite writers but I had to do a 180 after his insane defence of SBF It was hard to watch and made me question the accuracy of every single book of his that I had read. Never reading anything of his ever again. What a joke.
My mother lost all her hard-earned money during the war. My heart still sinks whenever I think of her. I think I know how you feel.
💯
If Michael Lewis were to interview me (unlikely, but if pigs had wings....) then I would be fascinated to learn more about his own character. I remember from his book about Liar's Poker and big swinging dicks how he briefly described his own foray into the world of 'fake' money before he signed out and became a writer... a strange metamorphosis!
Money wasn't on his radar....he just got into the habit of chartering a plane to fly his Amazon orders over to the Bahamas. Frugal guy, really.
Yes! I am so frustrated by ML’s focus on what SBF says versus what SBF did.
SBF exhibits many traits that are consistent with the diagnosis of psychopathy: lack of conscience or sense of guilt, lack of empathy, egocentricity, repeated violations of social norms, shallow emotions, and disregard of the law.
SBF took 14 billion of customer money to gamble. There's now excusing that.
Oh there is because he was allowed to function in this unregulated financial area, which isn't his fault, that's the fault of the American SEC, from what little I've heard of this discussion, his condition, if he was to go for it would be diagnosed as very high functioning on the autistic spectrum. He has no empathy with people and so losing people's life savings means very little if nothing to him because he can't feel what's that like. So when or if he is found guilty he will not understand what he has been found guilty for. I'm sorry, but the American financial unregulated system has allowed him to get away with this.
@@johnbascom4523💯agree. I think the purpose of his hefty donations to both parties were to keep crypto currencies being unregulated. If you were a politician, it's the easiest thing to do: getting paid for NOT doing your job, or at least doing it very slowly.
@@johnbascom4523 I think all this crypto is to be outside the boundaries of the SEC
@@johnbascom4523It was written in the bylaws of the FTX that no comingling was going to happen.
$8.9b I think
Interesting how much SBF contributed to Michael Lewis's latest book.
SBF is now SOL!
So, a party scene right out of the movie Being There...55:00...Micheal Lewis retracing Jerzey Kosinski's steps...
that pink suit with the heels is just mesmerising 🙂
Agree!
Did Sam ever give money for “good causes?” I know he made a lot of political contributions.
Good question…
He gave ~$140 million towards effective altruism (for reference he paid $200M to name his favourite e-sports team "FTX TSM") - so yes, but it seemed to me more like a PR play than true interest
No in any food bank in San Francisco or either help any homeless causes. It’s effective his altruism, serves to himself.
Someone mentioned that he gave around $300K for charity.
You have been bamboozled by a conman. Better luck next time
look at what money can buy, both Lewis and Couric. No worries guys, Son of a BF will rot in a prison cell for decades.
Modern version of Wall Street/Den of Thieves almost 40 years after: Changpeng Zhao is Gordon Gekko (Ian Boesky) and SBF is Budd Fox/(Michel Milken, It is funny how we got a nerdy empowered Ellison instead a sexy Darien Taylor). Not only greed is good, it is a den of complicity among influencers, sportst stars, actors, media, Political parties, authorities, regulators and every body who can´t see how this is the same era of speculative way of making rich, only with a new brand philosopher MacAskill and fool of psicological theories to justify criminal behavior covering a deep admiration to their god: $.
“Most people who got this rich had to do dig up oil, build railroads, build companies, really work… sbf didn’t have to stoop to such levels to get so rich, what a genius”. Lmao all he had to do was just catch money as people threw it at him
That should be SBF's defence that he is on the Autistic spectrum and he has a lack of empathy when it comes to communicating with people. So, as Michael talks about his naturing its quiet clear that at a young age he had some sort of mental emotional condition that no one picked up on and he was allowed to develop in this isolated way and left to his own devices.
I bet this comes up at sentencing.
It should do it is key to his defence. He needs to get a diagnosis. He would do in UK courts, don't know how USA system works with this issue.
This author is desperate that SBF “ special or unique “ no matter what the evidence is .
If I were a jury or a judge, that defense means nothing. He was capable to differentiate right vs wrong, and know what was what. Just because he couldn't feel doesn't mean he couldn't think. If that defense was allowed then we should let Harvey Weinstein or Bill Cosby out of jail, because they clearly couldn't feel the misery of their victims🙄
It sounds like the "spectrum" at play here is the narcissistic spectrum. If you're getting major autism vibes from someone who doesn't have an intellectual disability or hx of psychosis & who doesn't meet key diagnostic criteria for ASD, it's likely that what you're picking up on is pathological narcissism (of a more cerebral type).
Lewis says SBF never asked him any questions, then relates a question SBF asked him a few moments later...odd...16:00
I think that Lewis said that SBF never asked any question about Lewis himself. Maybe SBF was only interested in himself and didn't care about any other people really.
Hi Katie - I looked you up on Wikipedia and I got a positive impression of who you are. That's why I feel that you shouldn't have offered your condolences to Michael Lewis for the loss of his daughter online. That should have been private....
Katie Couric is an iconic journalist trusted by hundreds of millions of people. Trusted journalists responsibly reveal truths and enlighten us; in some situations condolences should be private. In this situation, her public condolences serve the greater good of her friend Michael and us as viewers (in our better understanding of the author).
I’m not a Katie apologist but how do we know that she didn’t say something privately as well as here?
This was a good interview until the end which really made me cringe. Why did you feel the need to express your condolences publicly? It felt so gratuitous, like you were looking for an emotional reaction from Mr Lewis. Your expression of sympathy could have been done personally and privately after the cameras stopped rolling if it were truly genuine and not for the sake of sensationalism. His daughter died 3 years ago so plenty of time for expressions of sympathy that need not have been public on your part. Really made me uncomfortable. Hopefully it didn't make Mr Lewis too uncomfortable.
Yes Michael Lewis, the Mom gave up and she let him turn into the unemotional self absorbed thief that he became, bad bad parenting.
Great content Katie & Guest. Timely. Shared this and both of you need to keep doing more of this.
Fascinating interview Katie.
I think what he meant to say was ‘satanic’ not ‘satiric’ 😂😂😈
Do they have Wi-Fi in jail?
Katy, you should hold your legs together. It looks manly when you sit like that. I like the pink though. Also, I would avoid the spike heels. Maybe 2 inch max for heels.
10 minutes in and feels like they are romanticizing SBF.
THE sloppy appearance was his MO
Life in jail for Sam Beckman
You guys described a psychopath.
Hot take y’got there! Very nuanced. 🔥
Excellent, informative and interesting interview. Thanks. I’ve been curious about SNF and you’ve brought a lot of answers. You had me tears with your tender comments at the end. Again, thanks.
You have been bamboozled by a conman. Better luck next time
So much cynicism and judgment in these comments, being cast on all the subjects participating in or focused on, in this fantastic interview.
I was hanging on every word. Katie’s questions were all better and smarter than the ones I had in my head. Michael’s answers were equally good.
Just an outstanding video from start to heartfelt finish. Thank you both.
Who are you to judge these comments? You are an arrogant tone deaf. Fraudsters must pay their crimes.
There is very little cynicism and judgement in these comments. Almost all of them are the same sort of sappy adulation as yours.
Katie's continual interruptions are annoying and often wildly irrelevant. Her continual ignorant gabble from 30:30 to around 33:30 is oddly ironic in that she starts the spew by saying, quite correctly, that she doesn't understand what Lewis is saying with perfect clarity, and then as he tries to straighten her out she keeps interrupting to make any explanation impossible.
Literary Anthropologist-- I love that!!!
I have a bad feeling the jury is going to get bamboozled and let him go, or at least be lenient. Also with the judge.
Sam may have wanted there to be a Sam just like everyone else...48:00...But I doubt he can find him...No one else has been able to, and he has shown that even though he wants to be different, against his best efforts, he has turned out to not to be...yet...
SBF = Sheldon + Mork
It's 95% nature
“I’m two years he hasn’t asked a single question about me” lmao sounds like a narcissist does it not
Lewis is deluded
No expense spared here in this setting, tape holding down the cables to the microphones.
Narcissistic Personality Disorder
I met this funny man....we went for coffee about 30times(about 2hours each time) he gave me presents.....but he never asked me anything ever...i felt 1dimensional,
Good questions Katie!❤
The only thing rhat the book, the alleged friendship ofthis author with SBF, and the state of the hundreds of irreguarilites that he, as a former snake salesman (bond salesman), prove, is that he is a snake looking for a story.A real friend would have rung alarm bells about the conflicts of interests, the comingling of funds. I sincerely think that if anybody could have mentored him and even his parents, since fhey dont know jack about running and exchange. broker dealer would be Michael Lewis. Instead, he was more interested in his story and book rather in the welfare of millions of investors
Scam Bankman is just as him parents , but that the diaguise fell off. Thats just it.
Celebrity love fest with SBF. No one seems to have had any any skepticism or subjected SBF to a critical analysis. It’s not SBF who is interesting, it’s the character of people who got on board. So “the emperor has no clothes”.
He's delusionally smitten by a scammers wealth. Glad I didn't buy his book
❤people who are unbanked
I heard yesterday a funny phrase, cigarettes are the cripto to inmates! What a great way to define crypto!
Exactly wrong.
Cigarettes are a prison currency based upon both utility and current perception-based market price.
Morphing from planning to save kid's lives in Africa to saving the human race sounds a bit like Elon Musk. It would be interesting to see how Elon Musk and SBF would have related to each other if they had had contact (maybe they did have superficial contact -- about doge coin maybe or making the human race a multi-planet species?).
The book says Sam wanted to be an investor in Elon's purchase of Twitter.
So, Katie misses the most interesting point...SBF is what happens when a person who might be human has no feeling of humanness, but senses that others do. And instead dives into his early family...disappointing, but to be expected...
he's a communal narcissist
🤔🤷🏻♀️🆗👋🏻👋🏻👋🏻
Yes Michael your point about fundamentals, hi-tec has no fundamentals its all based on the internet and movement of information and so there is no tangible pieces of equipment, its all in people's brains.
A massive brain? SBF is evolving from this to that. The dude is a fake and I would never consider him to be capable of being anyone's friend.
This guy is probably the worst journalist I’ve ever seen. He probably could have made even more money too if he didn’t make it so obvious he has no journalistic integrity. He could have possibly been the ‘sbf guy’ but people don’t even care what he has to say bc what he’s said is absurd
Stargate Katie 😂
Cryptocurrency is the internet bubble version 2.0 and it is going to last about a few years to a decade, because it runs on the GREED of people and willing to speculate on, well what exactly cryptocurrency is?
And until people can fully understand it real world application, the upside of this thing will be so ginormous that money will continue to flow into it.
I've come to dislike Michael Lewis.
Mike be gargling them SBF 🥜
The FTX case switched me from a fan of Michael Lewis to realizing just how STUPID he is. “Sam is not a fraudster” wow…. Ok buddy 😂
sbf's coxucker = lewis