zlacker

Unless Sam has managed to fool a bucket load of smart people, your prediction is very unlikely to be true (or rather, I don't want it to be true). Fuck.

>>ignora+(OP)
See, SBF

>>parthi+h1
New rule on hiring a tech leader, don't be named Sam.

>>ignora+(OP)
Corporate malfeasance is not exclusive to tech and neither are collections of incredibly intelligent people.

>>ignora+(OP)
It's not a prediction; it's a general comment that one shouldn't assume too much based on a limited number of datapoints, in this case someone who doesn't "know him well".

This works in two directions, by the way. In 2001 few would have expected that Bill Gates would spend much of his time on philanthropy. Is he a "good" or "bad" person? Well, he's both.

>>ignora+(OP)
Fooling someone, even smart person, is not that hard. It is just low-key.

>>ignora+(OP)
Not intending to attack you here, but it's important to remember that smart people can get fooled as easily as anyone else.

"Smart" does not mean "hard to fool;" they are different characteristics.

You can fool someone if you have important information that they don't have--even if they are extremely smart.

>>ignora+(OP)
He may not be fooling anyone. As someone else noted, if his interests and yours align you may be willing to look past his "badness". For example, Miles Bridges in the NBA. Seems like a genuinely bad guy who just got recactivated by an NBA team -- why? Probably because he can help them win games. I can almost guarantee no member of the front office would let their daughter date him, but they don't need him to be good for him to make them money.