SBF is a conman, period. He's not your typical psychopath, but a psychopath nevertheless. Throughout the book, Michael Lewis seems to try very hard to portray Sam as some clumsy, disheveled, misunderstood genius with nothing but the best intentions for humanity.

While this venture has not been a total waste of time, it was not that great either. I was quite surprised at the cultist following of the Effective Altruistic movement amongst the uber-rich. Some of the utilitarian reasoning is mind-bogglingly nonsensical , which makes the entire EA movement a scam of sorts , Not sure what Peter Singer thinks about it now . ( )

Mind-boggling. Really, no idea what to think. Of SBF and his friends/colleagues/family or crypto or virtually anything else. BONKERS. ( )

When a Michael Lewis book comes out, I am immediately interested, and this one did not disappoint. It has insights and funny moments and you always feel like you're in on some potentially profitable secrets until you remember that it's already too late. On the other hand, the book has an unfinished quality, as the trial of SBF had not yet happened when this book was published. Finishing the story would be an obvious thing to do for future editions. ( )

Entertaining, but shallow ( )

As a former business reporter back in the 1990s, I was eager to learn more about the wild and wacky world of cryptocurrency. I was even more eager to learn more about the stunning transformation of an eccentric billionaire into a universally reviled convicted fraudster. Lewis’ journalistic deep-dive into both the business dealings and the bizarre psyche of Sam Bankman-Fried provided some interesting insights and vivid behind-the-scenes anecdotes. Still, I was expecting to learn more than I did. Perhaps that’s because I previously read numerous lengthy articles and closely followed the criminal proceedings involving SBF and his former accomplices. Numerous critics have suggested that Lewis went overboard in trying to humanize a now-convicted felon who caused financial ruin for many people and destroyed the careers of others. I believe there’s some justification in this criticism. Most journalists are painfully aware of the fine line that is drawn between being “imbedded with” and “being in bed with” a source. What's more, some readers who don't have a fervent interest in the business arena will likely find some of the material to be "in the weeds." All of this being said, the author does an admirable job as a storyteller who explores an array of complex topics that range from cryptocurrency and shameless influence peddling to effective altruism. ( )