Hacker News Reader

Comment by fnbr | Hacker News Reader

It's incredible to think of all of the harm that Elizabeth Holmes has created through her desire to be the next Steve Jobs.

She has very probably killed people, ruined families, and caused at least one suicide [1].

And all for what? The company will probably be bankrupt. She'll suffer few consequences, as her connections will probably be enough for her to get a job as, at the very least, a VC or as an entrepreneur-in-residence at a VC firm.

It's incredible.

[1] http://www.businessinsider.com/theranos-ceo-elizabeth-holmes...

View on HN

From the article: "the elder Mr. Shultz said Ms. Holmes had told him Theranos’s blood-testing devices worked so well that they were being used in medevac helicopters and hospital operating rooms, Tyler Shultz recalls. He and his colleague knew that wasn’t true."

At that point it was an internally known failure yet she lied with a straight face. I'm full of contempt for such a creature and full of admiration for Tyler Shultz.

>elder Mr. Shultz said Ms. Holmes had told him Theranos’s blood-testing devices worked so well that they were being used in medevac helicopters and hospital operating rooms

wouldn't a CEO telling material lies about company's product to board members constitute some kind of felony fraud?

She is like Steve Jobs only in a superficial way. She has a privileged background while Steve Jobs grew up in a middle-class family which could not afford his college. She dropped out because she wanted to be like a dropout like Steve Jobs. She lied about her revolutionary products while Steve Jobs did create revolutionary products with others. She wears a turtle neck because Steve Jobs did.

I think Steve Jobs' family actually scrimped and saved to send him to Reed College. He dropped out for reasons other than financial.

Steve Jobs said (in the Stanford commencement address) that he couldn't tolerate seeing his parents spend their life savings on his college and so he dropped out.

Assuming she doesn't get prosecuted...

Like most sociopaths, she will no doubt reappear in a few years. She'll show up with some well-honed, vague expression of regret and implication that she was overwhelmed by her duty as a woman do accomplish whatever.

from your link:

> "When Rochelle called Holmes's office to explain what had happened, the secretary was devastated and offered her sincere condolences. She told Rochelle Gibbons that she would let Holmes know immediately. But a few hours later, rather than a condolence message from Holmes, Rochelle instead received a phone call from someone at Theranos demanding that she immediately return any and all confidential Theranos property."

To whom exactly is Ms. Holmes connected? There's an awful lot of cheering over her demise, but I haven't kept abreast of this story.

https://www.theranos.com/leadership/counselors

Kissinger, Shultz, William Perry, two Senators, an admiral... Pretty much a who's-who of Department of Defense insiders.

Now, it's entirely likely that these people would be more then happy to push her under the bus.

Ah, thanks. I should have done some Googling.

Her father's with USAID, which does help explain the foreign policy connections.

USAID is much more powerful than is commonly recognized, with an unclassified budget about twice that of the CIA, and is frequently involved in international strategic matters.

Holmes' father is also former Enron. Which might explain some things as well.

What role did he have there? Was he in a position to have known or participated in the fraud?

This is probably a naïve question, but what were they hoping to get out of it? Holmes gets catapulted to a position of power and does favors for them in return, the satisfaction of being a mentor, ...?

Money. If Theranos were financially successful (At getting an enormous DoD contract, even if they were, technologically a failure), they would have become very wealthy.

More accurate: Republican insiders. Shouldn't leave out the most important adjective.

Theranos was tied in to higher-ups in both parties. Holmes was doing fundraisers with Chelsea Clinton for Hillary's presidential bid.

So no, it's not the most important adjective.

Perry served under Bill Clinton.

There's a shortage of ethics across party lines.

Family friends with Tim Draper of DFJ.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com