“Because he’s following his principles, he is literally now subsisting on bread and water,”
And my first thought was “NOW he has principles?”
My thoughts exactly. Affluent jackass is still affluent… And a jackass.
*choosing to live on bread and water because he doesn’t want to eat the food
Next you’ll be telling me they won’t let him leave, even though he wants to.
This guy is in the extremely morally confused end of the Effective Altruist movement. He has an ethical compunction against eating animal products, but not against stealing. Veganism is far from universal among EAs, and most have at least a game-theoretic objection to stealing.
This guy is in the wolololololo school just like Steve Jobs. He’s so addicted to feeling like he’s smarter that he’ll spout any and all bullshit that will give him an opportunity to be in the role of the one who’s explaining it to his uninformed listener.
Yesterday’s article said it was bread, water, and peanut butter - now it’s just bread and water? I guess tomorrow we’ll hear that it’s just water alone?
Little rich kid fucked around and found out what real life is like.
I don’t understand. Surely they have foods that are vegan besides bread and water, right? Like, some vegetable being served or something?
I would be willing to bet he could toss a few salads.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
While in federal custody, the disgraced cryptocurrency entrepreneur Sam Bankman-Fried has been living off “bread and water” because he is not being provided with the vegan diet he requested, his attorney told a judge on Tuesday.
“Because he’s following his principles, he is literally now subsisting on bread and water,” Cohen said, adding that his client’s supply of the medication Emsam to treat depression was running low.
The founder of the cryptocurrency exchange FTX has been in federal jail since 11 August when Judge Lewis Kaplan revoked Bankman-Fried’s $250m bond.
Federal prosecutors said that Bankman-Fried “crossed a line” by sharing his former romantic partner Caroline Ellison’s personal writings with a New York Times reporter in an attempt to discredit his former partner and chief executive at his company, who is expected to testify against him at his scheduled 2 October trial.
Bankman-Fried’s lawyers said prosecutors mischaracterized his intentions in sharing Ellison’s writings, arguing he wanted to defend his reputation and that he had a right to speak to the press.
On 13 August federal prosecutors introduced a new indictment in which they charged the former billionaire with seven counts of fraud and conspiracy and accused Bankman-Fried of using stolen customer funds to make more than $100m in campaign contributions ahead of the 2022 US midterm elections.
The original article contains 320 words, the summary contains 216 words. Saved 32%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
I’ve heard this before and would like to spread the word: the dildo of consequences rarely comes lubed.
Okay. Let him self-induce scurvy if he wants to.
