By Bitcoin 雜誌 - 6 個月前 - 閱讀時間：6 分鐘
矽谷社會主義者：薩姆·班克曼-弗里德
“人們想要一個權威來告訴他們如何評價事物，但他們選擇這個權威不是基於事實或結果——他們選擇它是因為它看起來很權威或熟悉。”
-麥可劉易斯，《大空頭》。
著名作家邁克爾·劉易斯出版了他的書， 走向無限：新大亨的興衰， on the rise and fall of FTX on the first day of the trial of its notorious founder Sam Bankman-Fried (Bankman-Fried). The book has met with heavy criticism by commentators for its seemingly favorable portrayal of the millennial crypto founder.
這很有趣，因為從本質上講，班克曼弗里德的故事是一個非常老派的故事， 大空頭- 一個特權演員的故事，他為了自己的利益，利用我們社會的偏好對人們做出價值判斷，不是因為他們的過往記錄——或者正如劉易斯所說的“事實”——而是基於一組啟發法和「老練」人士的認可。
班克曼-弗里德說服那些我們相信是社會「聰明人」的人——包括路易斯——的能力是不可思議的。 但為什麼他們會愛上他呢？
也許，這是因為班克曼-弗里德是他們所理解的人。 他是一位內部人士，和他們一樣，將加密貨幣視為一個可以利用的社區，而不是一個需要滋養的生態系統。
加密殖民主義
Fortune Magazine in 他們的個人資料 of Bankman-Fried, wrote that the Bay Area native doesn’t look like the most powerful man in crypto. But is that really true?
If anything, a 20-something year-old man oozing social awkwardness, an MIT degree, and poor fashion-sense is the wet dream of many a modern “sophisticated” tech investor. Bankman-Fried could easily be a character on the HBO show 矽谷
現在，再加上他與生俱來的權利──他的父母都是現代商業大殿──史丹佛大學的法學教授，你幾乎就擁有了現代資本主義的救世主形象。
One need not look further than the praise given to him by Kevin O’Leary, saying “I'm a big advocate for Sam because he has two parents that are compliance lawyers." the Shark Tank investor said 在2022.
O’Leary continued: “If there's ever a place I could be that I'm not going to get in trouble, it's going to be at FTX.” We later found out that the Canadian investor was paid close to a million dollars an hour to be a public spokesperson for Bankman-Fried.
但除了班克曼-弗里德的真誠之外，吸引投資者註意力的真正賣點是班克曼-弗里德的使命。
不是 ”有效的利他主義” ——對於菁英金融家來說，訂閱流行的假同理心運動無疑是一個很好的行銷舉措。 但是，真正讓他的投資者興奮的是他相信加密貨幣不是一個值得建立的嚴肅行業，而是一個從賭徒那裡攫取大量資金的絕佳機會。
As a Sequoia Capital’s venture capitalist put it in a now deleted profile on Bankman-Fried, “Yes, crypto eventually could replace money, and, yes, it can eventually decentralize the web,” the investor said.
他繼續說：「但今天所有這些都不是真的。 那麼，今天人們在做什麼呢？ 他們進行交易。 如果人們進行交易，人們喜歡交易，那麼什麼是能夠賺大錢的商業模式呢？ 這將是一種交換。”
這句話顯示 Bankman-Fried 的投資者並不認為加密貨幣社群是認真的。 對他們來說，加密貨幣本身俱有與在拉斯維加斯賭場的老虎機上連續獲得三組櫻桃相同的社會意義。 投資賭場比投資櫻桃照片更好。
Agree or disagree with them, the crypto, and specifically the bitcoin subsection, of the community is serious with their goals. They are largely a set of libertarian, hyper-principled people. They are profoundly serious about their view on how blockchains can be used to liberate the currently unbanked, protect the value of one’s labor from ever increasing inflation, and connect people around the world through payments, and specifically remove government interference in money.
As Erik Voorhees’ puts it –– in what is now one of the final debates with Bankman-Fried –– “what we are doing here is in effect bringing the same separation that occurred between church and state to state and payments. In effect freeing people around the world.”
The earnesty of belief held by people like Voorhees doesn’t compute for people like Sequoia VC or Bankman-Fried. For them those beliefs were useful in that they got a community to work hard for close to no reward until the first few bitcoin bull runs. But the belief itself? For the jaded elite, a company mission often is a means to a single end: Enrich one’s bank account.
對他們來說，使命與做「慈善事業」一樣重要，或者在高中進行一次服務旅行，讓自己看起來像常春藤盟校招生官。 這只是「遊戲」的一部分。
This is quite problematic, since their investments in immature crypto companies –– and overall childish behavior, like when FTX 已籌集金額 $420,690,000 from 69 investors –– is a large part of the reason the “crypto” industry isn’t respected by the general public.
Moreover, Bankman-Fried regularly made statements criticizing bitcoin, for being “slow, and bulky.” Keep in mind, the bitcoin community not only birthed crypto, but are –– for 更好或更差 –– perhaps the most ideologically pure people in technology.
Moreover, Bankman-Fried sought to influence legislation that would impact the earnest bitcoin. Since he was –– prior to FTX’s collapse –– one of the biggest Washington donors, he likely would succeed in lobbying the government to follow his view.
But this here is a form of colonization. The crypto community was a vibrant ecosystem prior to Bankman-Fried’s entry. It was a bunch of misfits that came together to build something that was unique and important. A chance to feel empowered in a system they feel marginalized in. For Bankman-Fried and his cohorts to come into it aiming to make a percentage off of the trading fees of investors –– rather than create products and businesses in the ethos of bitcoin –– was their original sin.
我們應該對它最終崩潰感到驚訝嗎？
矽社會主義者
In a similar vein to a young child who asks “why doesn’t the government just print more money and give it to the homeless?” –– Bankman-Fried’s claim to fame was to make a lot of money and give it away. Like some benevolent patrician. Andrew Carnegie in board shorts.
但這真的是一種真正的慈善衝動，還是他的同理心只是某種增加社會資本的遊戲策略？
In a phone call with crypto reporter Tiffany Fong, Bankman-Fried said that he donated as much money to Republicans as he did Democrats, but did so quietly in order to gain favor with journalists who he felt were predominantly left wing. In other words, Bankman-Fried manufactured a public persona of humanitarianism, but in reality his raison d'être was to gain more power and clout
His former business partner Anthony Scaramucci 說 he saw Bankman-Fried as having a sort of “superiority complex.” So, perhaps in Bankman-Fried’s head he thought that he could single-handedly solve all of the world’s problems if only he had all of the money.
Whatever the truth may be –– what is it that made Bankman-Fried think that he had the right to use other’s money at his own discretion? Or for him to enter a space that he, once again, had close to nothing to do with creating. What made him think that he should be the authority who decides 哪些方面 are kosher or haram? Or write legislation for it?
At its core is a belief he was the smartest person in the room. A belief certainly had the innate privilege to feel given his parents’ societal standing, and his undeniable analytical wit. But, what was missing in the matrix of Bankman-Fried was a soul. A soul that would allow for him to truly respect community that he was entering as a stranger.
歷史上充滿了像班克曼-弗里德這樣的人的例子，他們上台後承諾成為一個新的、更公平的烏托邦的管理者。 事實上，他們尋求的主要改變是成為掌權者。 班克曼-弗里德採用了這個比喻，並融入了矽谷文化。
As Michael Lewis writes, for Bankman-Fried, most of life is just some kind of game. One which –– if most legal experts 是正確的 –– he won’t be getting any restarts on.
這是一篇客座文章 雅各·科茲帕特。 所表達的觀點完全是他們自己的觀點，並不一定反映BTC Inc或 Bitcoin 雜誌。
原始來源： Bitcoin 雜誌