Remix.run Logo
▲ why_at 3 hours ago

I just watched this movie tonight and it's one of those where I feel like everyone else saw a different film. For me it was too little butter spread over too much bread. All the interesting parts of the Holmes/Theranos story have been explored, so all that's left is her personal life with her new partner who's also a weirdo.

At best I can say that it makes you think about things like deceit and honesty/accuracy in media, but it definitely didn't blow my mind like it apparently did for this author. After 3 hours I was just exhausted from watching these peoples' tortuous attempts to avoid giving a direct answer to any question.

▲Betelbuddy an hour ago | parent | next [-]

>> It definitely didn't blow my mind like it apparently did for this author.

It did for the author because this is a service she provides. To even suggest that Elizabeth Holmes didn't really harm anyone because she in prison for investor fraud, and then have the nerve to call that distinction "nuance", is absurd.

Theranos generated around 7.8 million test results for Arizona consumers alone. Of those, roughly 834,000 had to be voided or corrected. These were real people getting medical information they relied on. Some received terrifying and incorrect indications of prostate cancer. Pregnant women received results suggesting they were miscarrying when they weren't.

It's like claiming a blood bank supervisor didn't put patients at risk by giving them incompatible blood transfusions, simply because the state only managed to prosecute them for pirating the inventory software they were using.

She did it before for Paul Logan and Anthony Scaramucci, and now is softening the road for Elizabeth Holmes pardon.

She did the same in her newsletter for Logan Paul when he was trying to move beyond his image as a toxic YouTube prankster, and spent months embedded with him and his brother.

Then did the same for Anthony Scaramucci, when he had to rebuild his credibility in the investment world, as his bitcoin hedge fund was about to go nowhere. Pompliano opens with his fascination with astrology. Astrology!

Call monsters what they are. The victims deserve it.

▲ 11 minutes ago | parent | next [-]
[deleted]
▲EdwardDiego 26 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

Great comment, thank you for centering it on the actual victims of her deceit.

▲gyomu 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> After 3 hours I was just exhausted from watching these peoples' tortuous attempts to avoid giving a direct answer to any question.

I’ve been around a lot of bullshitters my whole life, and my immediate reaction is to go “this person is full of shit, not worthy of my attention, kthxbye”

But I’ve noticed that most people when faced with the same person can’t help but try and figure out what makes them tick, or their redeeming qualities, or if even anything can be redeemed. It seems to be a social equivalent of “nerd sniping”; most people just have a very hard time declaring “this person is worth 0 additional seconds of my time” and actually following through.

See also ppl in toxic relationships, who will complain to their friends incessantly about how bad the other person is and how they know they need to get out of it, only to rarely get out of it.

▲MrGilbert 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> most people just have a very hard time declaring “this person is worth 0 additional seconds of my time” and actually following through.

I think that's what "setting boundaries" is about: Standing your own ground, and decide: "Not worth my time and energy.", yet still believe in the good in people. I think even bad people have something good in them. It's just not healthy to figure it out for me, once the manipulative (or bad) habits have surfaced.

▲scotty79 3 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> I’ve been around a lot of bullshitters my whole life, and my immediate reaction is to go “this person is full of shit, not worthy of my attention, kthxbye”

I have something like that, but not (just?) for people. When I read (or listen to) something I very often fairly quickly recognize meta signs of bs and go 'kthxbye'. I call it bullshit filter and I am often surprised that some, even fairly intelligent, people can have suprinsingly weak one. As for morbid curiosity towards bs, I have very little. I'm even afraid that being too curious about it might be detrimental so I'm keeping my distance even when I engage somewhat.

▲sevenseacat 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I think its because the constant bullshitting is behaviour that is so foreign to us, we feel a curiosity about it, a need to understand it.

▲strbean 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> or their redeeming qualities

I can't stand this. Most people who suck aren't an onion. They just suck. Or there is a nice layer under that, and then beneath that a core of suck.

▲close04 an hour ago | parent [-]

Reminder to everyone that an onion is an onion all the way to the core. Every layer is more eye sting for the peeler.

▲rolosa 32 minutes ago | parent [-]

I value my time. I'm not going to peel all the way down if I don't think it's worth my time.

▲TheOtherHobbes 41 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

That's a strategy when it's personal. But it's catastrophic when Bullshiter Mode doesn't just define a person, it defines an entire industry - arguably the politics and economics of entire countries - and the only way to give it zero attention is to go fully off-grid and live like a hermit.

Holmes is interesting because she's not a freak or a one-off. She's pretty much a generic tech startup CEO billionaire wannabe, finance industry person, and/or familiar political archetype - arguably more extreme than most, but there's nothing truly exotic about the DNA here.

▲rrr_oh_man 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> But I’ve noticed that most people when faced with the same person can’t help but try and figure out what makes them tick, or their redeeming qualities, or if even anything can be redeemed. It seems to be a social equivalent of “nerd sniping”; most people just have a very hard time declaring “this person is worth 0 additional seconds of my time” and actually following through.

I don't think I've ever seen anyone put this into words.

Thank you. A very compelling thought.

▲IshKebab 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I've only met one constant bullshitter in my life and unfortunately I worked with him so couldn't just leave. The thing that blew my mind was that nobody else seemed to care, at all. I get that it takes a significant amount of social capital to call out a bullshitter, especially at work... but still.. you don't have to believe them. Very weird.

▲squidmaster an hour ago | parent [-]

When you're working with a bullshitter and can't just leave, what use is there in performative caring? Your coworkers may have still cared, privately, but actively complaining about it, presuming boss man doesn't care anyway, is just pissing into the wind. You may as well accept that he's a bullshitter and get over it. Some people are like that and it doesn't help you to spend your time seething over it.

If you can get him fired then go for it. Otherwise, you're only harming yourself by letting yourself dwell on it. As for believing him; when my coworker starts rambling about the time the Navy seals came to him for help, I just say "wow man, crazy". I don't believe him, but neither do I confront it. Why bother? I'm not being paid to call out his dumb lies. This is probably what your other coworkers were thinking.

▲joaquieneCnix 25 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

note, especially in cases like Holmes et al., how these people are full of shit for the sake of being full of shit. they are not just deceptive for their own sake but for the "et al."s sake, too, often enough just being the one thrown or throwing themselves under the bus to distract from or obscure what's going on "generally" or "currently, specifically" in that industry or it's supply chain and derivatives. you can spin up the whole story within the bigger picture, including "corona mass testing & sites cough cough, vaccines & boosters cough cough" and so on or look at the finer details of Holmes et al. endeavor itself and what derivatives the details "enabled" ...

it's hard to see through at first, but toxic relationships often actively obfuscate the toxicity of the social circle the partner is a--often seemingly lesser--part of ... but that's child play and toxicity or even betrayal on these levels is only "hard" if one loses more than a good conscious decade. in professional lives however, that harm is pretty much irreversible, within a single project's time frame, ... what's lost, practically non-retrievable, non-compensable ...

That whole Holmes story felt dodgy from the start. What she was gunning for was partially (recursively) done elsewhere, successfully. Then the whole Corona bit broke out and I still find myself wondering what the fuck ... but that might be a residue non-actual-conspiratorial-they-are-hiding-aliens kind of thought process that still wants to write one or the other post-they-don't-have-the-capacity-to-tap-everyone's-phone-calls and tor-exit-nodes-are-definitely-mostly-owned-by-the-same-privacy-loving-folks-who-maintain-those-8mil-lines-of-linux-and-other-distros story ...

▲cindyllm 15 minutes ago | parent [-]

[dead]

▲sublinear an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> most people just have a very hard time declaring “this person is worth 0 additional seconds of my time”

You have to admit that shutting people out is still a defense mechanism that can backfire.

You're not immune from a skilled sociopath for doing this. They know what you're doing. The moment you turn your back is when they know they can blindside you.

It's the moment they start talking behind your back, shutting you out of conversations, undermining your work, etc. You're a lot more vulnerable when you're out of the loop. You can't assume you're stronger or smarter for trying to take the "high road". There is no high road with these people. They'll ruin everything in any way possible. They have their bases covered.

▲Terr_ an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

[dead]

▲a3w 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

German nerd here. I know next to nothing about "the interesting parts of the Holmes/Theranos story", is there a documentary on the facts instead of the villain somewhere?

▲emmelaich 2 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

> Tyler Shultz went to work at Theranos right out of Stanford and soon noticed that things weren't as they seemed. Lots of other employees knew there was something fishy going on, but Tyler was one of a tiny handful able to resist the mesmerizing and intimidating Elizabeth Holmes and speak out about the fraud that was putting patients at risk.

https://www.thesocialradars.com/transcripts/TSR-S4-Tyler-Shu...

https://www.thesocialradars.com/transcripts/TSR-S4-Tyler-Shu...

▲p1anecrazy 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

“Bad Blood” by the journalist who broke the story while Theranos was peaking

▲samizdis 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I don't know of any worthy documentary, but I have read the book "Bad Blood" [0], which I thought was thorough, well written and, to me, an excellent read.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bad_Blood:_Secrets_and_Lies_in...

▲saikatsg an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

There's a miniseries: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Dropout

▲tmerse 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Try the book: Bad Blood: Secrets and Lies in a Silicon Valley Startup

▲ an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]
[deleted]
▲ an hour ago | parent | prev [-]
[deleted]