Not all that long ago, Shkreli was doing a stream on periscope where he asked people to call his personal number and tell him why they hated him. Most people were calling him and making up stories about the drug price killing their grandma or complaining about the wu-tang album, and his response was to be friendly, down-to-earth, and even charming in a way while re-framing the complaints into stuff that worked towards his favor (ie: "I gave the drug for free to people who couldn't pay, nobody died" and "Wu-Tang needed money, I like them, and they liked the offer I made"). For the most part it worked. He was trying to make the point that he wasn't an evil, awful guy, and that any "hate" people held for him was more of a trend of directing general anger towards him, rather than genuine, personal, hatred.
On a whim though, a friend of mine and I called in, and by chance, we got through. The friend told him we hated him, but not for any of that stuff in the news. We hated him for squandering his wealth, time, and talents on ridiculous social media trolling (like the periscope thing). This actually seemed to get to him a bit, the conversation lasted at least 10 minutes. He justified it by saying stuff like "Some people relax by drinking and doing drugs, some people play sports, I like trolling people. What's the difference?". Ultimately, he tried to convince us that he was still trying to do meaningful stuff and that he wasn't obsessed with his social media presence (he even held up some book about AngularJS he said he was reading for a new startup to prove it, which we sorta laughed at). But he seemed a little unsettled by how the whole thing ended (us hanging up on him after he kept trying to maneuver out of the conversation in a way that made him look good).
I got the feeling that he truly thought anyone who spent more than a few minutes with him would like him, and see through what he saw as an unfair media assault on him. Maybe he had this same attitude going into court too. Only reason I can think for him to behave so brashly throughout.
I remember that one. He said he was learning to program (maybe it was angular JS, but are you sure it wasn't a book on mongodb?).
I know that if someone were to question how I spend my time, it would strike a chord. Anyone who prides themselves on their work ethic would take the question personally.
If he devotes 2 or 3 hours to trolling or taking calls while doing other stuff what's the matter?
You are doing the same thing you complain he's doing. Why do you want to get the final word that all that he's doing is squandering his wealth and talent?
Also you laughed at the fact that he was reading an AngularJS book for his new startup? Really funny. And then he seemed unsettled that you hanged up on him. Makes sense.
No, no it's not. Shkreli wasn't even that bad of a dude. He was evil in the public eye because he wanted to be and honestly helped out a lot of bullshit happening in the pharmaceutical industry (that we already knew). Shkreli went to jail because reddit thought he was the worst dude in the world and he was the perfect skapegoat in the situation. People think justice was served even though it never will be.
Sidenote: Hope his WuTang album goes into the public domain after this.
Please don't distort the record. He committed a crime (defrauding investors) which carried potential prison time as a sentence. Prosecutors sought 15 years. The judge sentenced him to just 7. Considering he displayed disdain for the law and showed little hope for reform, putting him away for 7 years seemed reasonable to the judge, as he would have likely committed more crimes had he gotten off with a wrist slap.
No, it isn't fair. Moreover Shkreli's crime isn't within an order of magnitude of what Holmes did in terms of financial damage. Shkreli wasn't endangering lives with fake products.
I'm pleased the Shkreli is doing time. That sends the right message. Holmes skating with a fine does not send the right message.
"Typically you get more sympathy from the criminal justice system if you’re an attractive young woman than a brash, arrogant young male"
The proper comparison would be to "brash, arrogant young women". You can even keep attractive as in "attractive, brash, arrogant young X" if you must. As in, large factor seem to be that Holmes was better at following layers advice about how to act in public and during investigation. She might be sociopath or whatever, but she managed not to be one publicly during the time the case was processed.
Alternatively you can compare attractive polite young man to attractive polite young women. Or leave gender out. But hell, keep "ability to follow lawyers advice and not tease people in justice system while it is litigated" constant.
Maybe justice system should be less eager to take offense. It just so happen that cops, prosecutors and judges are extremely easy to offend and have quite a lot of power. But you know, not calling prosecutor idiot while he is deciding about you is an important life skill if you plan to break the law.
It's not over yet - Holmes could still do time for fraud.
Re Shkreli, as soon as he was convicted for security fraud and paroled he offered money to assault Hillary Clinton. What would you do as a judge? http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-41262249
Not fair for Shkreli, but he brought it upon himself. He made such a spectacle of his situation that prosecutors and judges had to hit him hard. They would have been highly criticised otherwise.
Also, Holmes had so many high power people associated with the company that the media would have had a field day reporting on that and it would have been highly embarrassing for them. I'm sure they all helped her get the best deal.
My view is that they both broke the law so they should have gotten time.
Lesson learned, if you get in trouble with the law don't poke the bear.
I find it typical that Shkreli was convicted for ripping off rich people, while his ripping off poor people turned out to be totally legal. Fair? Not remotely.
Let’s stop pretending that we, as a society, care about fairness here. Rich people always get away with more shit. Let’s just enjoy one rich asshole getting part of what he deserved instead of lamenting about how a second rich asshole didn’t. And yes, I said to enjoy it because don’t pretend these stories means anything more to you than the entertainment value. Either you ignore them or you acknowledge it is tabloid drama that you enjoy (I am in the latter group). Dude was a rich asshole who took internet trolling from a middle school hobby to a lifestyle. The deck was stacked in his favor and he still blew it. That’s what we care about and why we like this story.
[+] [-] sudosteph|8 years ago|reply
Not all that long ago, Shkreli was doing a stream on periscope where he asked people to call his personal number and tell him why they hated him. Most people were calling him and making up stories about the drug price killing their grandma or complaining about the wu-tang album, and his response was to be friendly, down-to-earth, and even charming in a way while re-framing the complaints into stuff that worked towards his favor (ie: "I gave the drug for free to people who couldn't pay, nobody died" and "Wu-Tang needed money, I like them, and they liked the offer I made"). For the most part it worked. He was trying to make the point that he wasn't an evil, awful guy, and that any "hate" people held for him was more of a trend of directing general anger towards him, rather than genuine, personal, hatred.
On a whim though, a friend of mine and I called in, and by chance, we got through. The friend told him we hated him, but not for any of that stuff in the news. We hated him for squandering his wealth, time, and talents on ridiculous social media trolling (like the periscope thing). This actually seemed to get to him a bit, the conversation lasted at least 10 minutes. He justified it by saying stuff like "Some people relax by drinking and doing drugs, some people play sports, I like trolling people. What's the difference?". Ultimately, he tried to convince us that he was still trying to do meaningful stuff and that he wasn't obsessed with his social media presence (he even held up some book about AngularJS he said he was reading for a new startup to prove it, which we sorta laughed at). But he seemed a little unsettled by how the whole thing ended (us hanging up on him after he kept trying to maneuver out of the conversation in a way that made him look good).
I got the feeling that he truly thought anyone who spent more than a few minutes with him would like him, and see through what he saw as an unfair media assault on him. Maybe he had this same attitude going into court too. Only reason I can think for him to behave so brashly throughout.
[+] [-] ToFundorNot|8 years ago|reply
I know that if someone were to question how I spend my time, it would strike a chord. Anyone who prides themselves on their work ethic would take the question personally.
What was the end goal of asking the question?
[+] [-] rainieri|8 years ago|reply
If he devotes 2 or 3 hours to trolling or taking calls while doing other stuff what's the matter?
You are doing the same thing you complain he's doing. Why do you want to get the final word that all that he's doing is squandering his wealth and talent?
Also you laughed at the fact that he was reading an AngularJS book for his new startup? Really funny. And then he seemed unsettled that you hanged up on him. Makes sense.
[+] [-] gormz|8 years ago|reply
Sidenote: Hope his WuTang album goes into the public domain after this.
[+] [-] 9889095r3jh|8 years ago|reply
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/09/business/martin-shkreli-s...
[+] [-] unknown|8 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] Zigurd|8 years ago|reply
I'm pleased the Shkreli is doing time. That sends the right message. Holmes skating with a fine does not send the right message.
[+] [-] projectramo|8 years ago|reply
If it isn't fair, it isn't fair because his behavior -- however off-putting -- should not have lead to such severe punishment.
I don't have an opinion as to whether it was fair because I don't know the details.
I suspect the things that he did legally were often far worse than the things he did illegally.
[+] [-] watwut|8 years ago|reply
The proper comparison would be to "brash, arrogant young women". You can even keep attractive as in "attractive, brash, arrogant young X" if you must. As in, large factor seem to be that Holmes was better at following layers advice about how to act in public and during investigation. She might be sociopath or whatever, but she managed not to be one publicly during the time the case was processed.
Alternatively you can compare attractive polite young man to attractive polite young women. Or leave gender out. But hell, keep "ability to follow lawyers advice and not tease people in justice system while it is litigated" constant.
Maybe justice system should be less eager to take offense. It just so happen that cops, prosecutors and judges are extremely easy to offend and have quite a lot of power. But you know, not calling prosecutor idiot while he is deciding about you is an important life skill if you plan to break the law.
[+] [-] gormz|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tim333|8 years ago|reply
Re Shkreli, as soon as he was convicted for security fraud and paroled he offered money to assault Hillary Clinton. What would you do as a judge? http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-41262249
[+] [-] patrickg_zill|8 years ago|reply
To call it assault is overblown.
[+] [-] WheelsAtLarge|8 years ago|reply
Also, Holmes had so many high power people associated with the company that the media would have had a field day reporting on that and it would have been highly embarrassing for them. I'm sure they all helped her get the best deal.
My view is that they both broke the law so they should have gotten time.
Lesson learned, if you get in trouble with the law don't poke the bear.
[+] [-] charlesdm|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] notlob|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mcv|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] rainieri|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] patrickg_zill|8 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] yifanlu|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] rainieri|8 years ago|reply
And a lot of people do care about fairness. He wouldn't have delved in this troll personality if the witch hunt hadn't happened.
Don't put everyone in the same bag.