Hacker News Reader

Comment by dgfitz | Hacker News Reader

> the federal agency confirmed to the newspaper that it did not give permission for the interview with Carlson to go forward.

I didn’t realize it was so hard to control the freedoms of inmates. I actually thought that was the whole point.

View on HN

It actually is quite difficult, outside of solitary confinement. It's not a panopticon. You're not watched closely most of the time. Many violations are ignored.

It's likely not a violation they'll allow twice. But it's not at all surprising that it happened once.

Seems odd it’s easy for a nationwide interview to happen on the sly in prison. But then again, what do I know?

This was actually somewhat clever, but very dishonest. He used a link to the outside that is normally used solely for discussions between inmates and their lawyers; the catch is that on the other end was Tucker, not his lawyer.

So SBF kind of snuck the interviewer in under the guise of it being a legal meeting.

That’s why the prison got pissed.

For a Hail Mary, I get it. But it’s definitely either pardon or not, as a result. He’s not getting out on good behavior any time soon, lol.

Yeah I mean if I were Trump I still wouldn't trust him considering his history

Brave of you to assume what Trump would think.

To me any decision could come out of the White House these days. If Trump decides to drop a nuclear bomb in China for no reason, I would not be surprised. Not that it is likely, but I have lowered my expectations enough.

Trump seems inclined to drop charges or pardon people who he feels were unjustly persecuted by the Biden administration. I don't see any way for Bankman-Fried to make that case.

Also potential sex offenders who are facing both Romanian and UK charges.

You don't? Just outright lie and fabricate a narrative where he was unjustly persecuted by the Biden administration - the same as the rest of the Trumpists have done. 140 character attention spans love an underdog story, and 140 characters isn't nearly long enough to reiterate things like why we have laws in the first place.

Ah I didn’t realize that. Holmes also seemed to try and throw a Hail Mary by this logic.

I guess I get it, what else do you have to lose?

Well, building a case for an early release on good behavior is something he definitely burned here. But he's got a long sentence. He can start building that from square one again. Maybe.

Given that federal convincts don't have parole the good behavior part won't matter for that. But it will mean more solitary and other punitive measures.

Good point.

I may be wrong, but on the face of it, to interview with TC says a lot about who and what you are.

Out of all the things SBF has done, who he chooses to interview with is so so so far down there.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com