It is a paradox of history that the people who bring down empires are often obscure and unimportant figures. In the 1930s, an elite FBIThe Federal Bureau of Investigation, which investigates crimes on a national level in the USA. unit was tasked with bringing down gangster Al CaponeAn Italian-American gangster of the early 20th Century who became famous during the Prohibition era.. But in the end it was two minor officials who got Capone imprisoned; not for his many murders and thefts, but for tax evasion.

So it was with Sam Bankman-FriedAn American entrepreneur who was the youngest billionaire in the world. He had pledged to give most of his wealth to charity across his life, before being arrested on fraud charges., known by his initials, SBF. It was not the government who brought him down, but an amateur sleuthDetective. named James Block, whose hobby is looking into financial crimes.

Early last month, Block published a blog post suggesting that SBF's company Alameda Research had run out of money. Within a few weeks, SBF's entire fortune had disappeared.

And on Monday night, SBF was arrested at his home in the BahamasA country in the Caribbean. at the request of the US government. He was later charged with fraudDeceiving others for gain, often financial. .

It has left many wondering what went wrong. Some pin the blame on SBF's philosophy.

SBF was a believer in effective altruism (EA). The idea behind EA is simple: we should all seek to do the most good we can for the whole of mankind.

In recent years, many Effective Altruists have turned to "longtermism". This is the idea that our main aim should be ensuring future generations can survive and flourish.

Some think SBF was so fixated on doing good for the whole of humanity and for future generations that he felt he could do anything he liked in the here and now.

Earlier this year, Alameda lost huge amounts of money. Some insiders have claimed SBF decided to save it by taking customers' money from his other firm, FTX, and using it to bail out Alameda.¹

From an EA perspective, the reasoning is clear: it would be better to steal from a relatively small group of customers to ensure the money would keep flowing and benefiting the whole of humanity.

Yes: SBF was clearly a strong believer in EA, and it seems likely that it shaped his decision-making. He was so fixated on the whole of humanity and its future that he lost the capacity to think about the here and now.

No: This is a story as old as time: someone who was not suited to run a company making terrible mistakes and costing other people money. SBF's errors are his own.

Or... SBF's mistakes were driven by one particular form of EA: one that has total faith in individual decision-making. It is a sign that EA needs to be implemented in a completely different way.