2026-01-09 05:22:49

I initially leaned towards forgiving SBF, but later realized that things are not so simple. On one hand, he indeed developed some of the best products in cryptocurrency history and propelled the industry forward. On the other hand, the issues between him and Caroline Ellison make the overall assessment extremely contradictory. It's difficult to balance a person's technical achievements with their moral flaws—when misconduct involves harm to others, can pure product contributions still be justified? Perhaps there is no simple answer to this question.

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

24 Likes

Reward
24
6
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

UnruggableChad

· 01-11 03:43

A good product can't save bad people, and that is the answer.

View OriginalReply0

MevShadowranger

· 01-10 12:08

Genius can't save bad people, and no matter how awesome the product is, it can't make up for a scammer's guilt.

View OriginalReply0

GovernancePretender

· 01-09 05:52

A good product can't hide bad character... To put it simply, no matter how great an exchange is, it can't recover the lost profits of the squeezed retail investors.

View OriginalReply0

CoconutWaterBoy

· 01-09 05:42

Having technical skills is useless if you harm real people; you must take responsibility.

View OriginalReply0

MevWhisperer

· 01-09 05:40

The product is awesome, but using investors' money to play around, there's no way to justify that.

View OriginalReply0

RugpullTherapist

· 01-09 05:39

Does a good product mean you can deceive people? No, this is the funniest paradox in crypto. --- Honestly, SBF's claim of "contributing to the industry" sounds like an excuse for himself. --- Being technically awesome ≠ a moral license; confusing the two is really absurd. --- Once the Caroline incident came out, all product contributions are meaningless— isn't this just a scam? --- Forget it, whitewashing is the cheapest thing in this circle. --- I just want to know what the victims think, still having to listen to these arguments like "but he did good things." --- A typical "great person has flaws" narrative, but this time the flaw is literally fraud.

View OriginalReply0