Progressive epilepsy that only got worse and untreatable. The most powerful of drugs wouldn’t work. I had an experimental surgery; more of my brain was removed than usual.
I wonder if it is all legal had he been forthcoming. I heard the "borrow money to pay dividends" thing was a well worn playbook. Not necessarily a ponzi. ut usally borrowed money serviced by earnings. Is it illegal because it wasn't stated? How to they prize apart ponzi from just aggressive debt.
If they had accurately stated the value and cash flow of the businesses and been transparent about where the money was going then technically they would have been fine.
But if they had been honest about the performance of the businesses and the way the money was being used, they would not have attracted as much investment money. A few gullible people, but not $112 million worth.
The misrepresentation was key to attracting the investment.
"Ponzi scheme" isn't a legal term, the specific SEC claims are all about fraud. But the point of calling it that is to emphasize that there was very little underlying business value to be honest about. I don't think there's any point in picking apart the story for the few parts that might have been legal if they were properly disclosed - if the SEC's allegations are correct, many of those parts would have only existed in the first place as tools to help disguise the fraud.
It's only a Ponzi if you are not actually engaged in any real business activity. Financing payments to early investors with later investors money isn't a great indicator of the quality of the business but it's acceptable if you aren't misrepresenting things to get the new investors and there is legitimate business activity.
OK: AI is slow when using the said loop. AI is like poker. You bet with time. 60 seconds to type prompt and generate a response. Oh it is wrong ok let's gamble another 60 seconds...
At least when doing stuff the old way you learn something if you waste time.
That said AI is useful enough and some poker games are +EV.
So this is more caution-AI than anti-AI take. It is more an anti-vibe-koolaid take.
This depends entirely on how you use said AI. You can have it read code, explain why was it done this or that way, and once it has the context you ask to think about implementing feature X. There is almost no gambling involved there, at best the level frustration you would have with a colleague. If you start from blank context, tell it to implement full app, you are purely just gambling.
> You can have it read code, explain why was it done this or that way,
The thing is that, once you're experienced enough, it's faster to just glance at the code and have the answer right, instead of playing the guessing game with AI.
> and once it has the context you ask to think about implementing feature X
I'm always amazed at someone using that methodology. When I think about a feature, first is to understand the domain, second is which state I'm like to start from and where all the data are. If you don't get these two steps right, what you'll have is a buggy/incomplete implementation. And if you do get these steps right, the implementation is likely trivial.
I'm not sure where is the misunderstanding but your second paragraph is exactly why I ask AI the questions you question in the first paragraph. I ask the AI to do the domain research, see what we are starting from and THEN ask it to think about a feature. They are not really for me, they are for the AI to have good context what we are working on. As you said, the implementation is then almost trivial and the AI is less likely to mess it up.
The thing is, the domain is often more difficult than the actual implementation. And often only a subset matters (different for each task). So I’m wondering if teaching the AI the correct subdomain is indeed faster than just code the solution.
Also trivial work can benefit the coder. Like a light jog between full sprints for your brain. Reviewing code can be more taxing than writing it as you need to retieve the full context at once instead of incremental steps.
Why doesnt apple add a repair mode? Access to most settings but not data? Then train users to never give their password to Apple (like banks say never say even to us your PIN or online password)
