It’s possible that I shall make an ass of myself. But in that case one can always get out of it with a little dialectic. I have, of course, so worded my proposition as to be right either way (K.Marx, Letter to F.Engels on the Indian Mutiny)
Saturday, November 19, 2022
UH OH
'Sonic The Hedgehog' Creator Yuji Naka Arrested For Insider Trading
Naka is alleged to have bought stock in developer Aiming based on inside information.
·
The Lede
Yuji Naka, Sonic's co-creator and the former head of developer Sonic Team, has been arrested for insider trading in Tokyo.
Key Details
Naka is said to have bought stock in developer Aiming, in early 2020, based on inside info about the mobile game "Dragon Quest Tact," it was working on.
The partnership between Aiming and Square Enix — where Naka worked — to develop the game had not yet been made public.
According to the Tokyo District Public Prosecutors Office's special investigations unit, Naka bought 10,000 shares in Aiming for about $20,000. It is not clear whether he sold the shares following announcement of the Dragon Quest game.
Consider for a moment the plight of the penis-having superhero actor.
It’s a tall order, playing pretend while having to embody impossible physical ideals and also wear elaborate costumes meant to approximate outfits that are drawn on the page without much regard for physics. What’s more, these costumes are not built for real life, but for the screen. Sometimes, this makes being a real human being an inconvenience — dicks can get in the way of what a superhero movie is trying to accomplish. In the case of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, the mission is often to portray heroes as conventionally attractive and without sexuality as possible. Sometimes, this is difficult.
Before we continue, it’s worth noting that “costume” is a generous term. In the comic books, Namor’s most iconic outfit is a green Speedo made of scales of some sort, paired with his bad attitude. For Namor’s Marvel Cinematic Universe debut, the outfit was made a bit more elaborate. The Speedo was swapped for form-fitting swim shorts, and it was supplemented with lots of jewelry that doesn’t really work as a shirt but can charitably be called a breastplate. The math of the situation is simple, though: Put someone with a penis in swim shorts in water, and the results can be illuminating.
Bulge is a regular concern in superhero costume design, as form-fitting costumes that are meant to highlight — or enhance — idealized bodies leave little to the imagination, and even help it along, by design. But cultural ideas about “appropriateness” must also be observed, and Disney is arguably the most rigid in its quest to be the most “family-friendly” megacorporation in entertainment. Usually, this translates to working very hard to deny sex exists, or that people are capable of having it.
This, as many on social media have noted, results in the extremely funny and very plausible assumption that there are people somewhere in a Marvel or Disney office working very hard to edit every bit of footage that might possess a whiff of penis, lest the world be scandalized at the existence of genitalia. (A Disney publicist did not respond to Polygon’s request for comment.)
Seen from this angle, this is laughable. People have dicks! The context isn’t prurient, and making a big deal over something is a great way to call attention to it.
However, there are several other plausible explanations — Disney being squeamish about dicks is just the most entertaining one to contemplate. It’s also possible, for example, that simple capitalism is at play here, as footage deemed “inoffensive” has the longest reach across varying cultural and social mores across the globe. It’s also possible that Huerta himself didn’t want his member to be indirectly served up on the silver screen in one of the biggest films of the year.
In which case, allow us to offer our sympathies. Comic book superheroes can be wonderful characters but also sexless, and the demands of their box-office dominance mean real people must be contorted into shapes defined purely by muscles and ideals, which are then reflected in costuming. But this is merely a first step, as the person wearing the clothes is just another fabric for digital tailors to sculpt, trim, and tuck as deemed necessary, until there’s little difference between the character seen on screen and the impossible one that was born on the page.
QUOTE OF THE YEAR
FIFA President Gianni Infantino Defends Qatar With This Quote: 'I Feel Qatari, I Feel Gay'
Infantino began his speech, which lasted for 57 minutes, with: "Today I feel Qatari. Today I feel Arabic. Today I feel African. Today I feel gay. Today I feel disabled. Today I feel like a migrant worker."
BEND IT LIKE BECKHAM
‘A gay icon no more’: will David Beckham’s Qatar role kill his brand?
The man once called ‘Golden Balls’ has put his enduring appeal to the test in becoming the face of a controversial World Cup
Beckham is the pre-eminent figure of the World Cup promotions.
Wherever Fahad, a gay man in his 40s, walks in his home city of Doha, from the Qatari capital’s coastal promenade, known as the Corniche, to the gleaming streets of the super-modern downtown Msheireb district, David Beckham smiles down from the billboards and the big flashing screens.
The former England captain, husband to the former Spice Girl Victoria, father to Brooklyn, Romeo, Harper and Cruz, is not just a face of the World Cup kicking off this Sunday, he is the pre-eminent figure – a 2022 version of the 1966 mascot World Cup Willie some might be tempted to say, if not something cruder.
Fahad tries to be understanding about the temptation posed by the £150m deal that Beckham is said to have been offered by Qatar, albeit the value of the contract is disputed. But the former footballer’s decision to accept the fortune from the royal house of Thani and take up the ambassadorial role is, to Fahad’s mind, a damnable pact worthy only of scorn.
“I see that his future will be ruined but at least he will have some millions,” said Fahad, who as a younger man spent two and a half months in solitary confinement in a Qatari prison for the crime of wearing makeup. “No, nothing has changed for us.”
Same-sex sexual activity is punishable by seven years in prison in Qatar. Under an interpretation of sharia law, it can lead to a death sentence. There is not so much an LGBTQ+ community in Qatar as a disparate collection of terrified individuals.
This summer, Beckham, 47, took part in a promotional film for Visit Qatar in which he spoke of the pride of Qataris about their culture. “The modern and traditional fuse to create something really special,” he said. It is his image flashing across Qatari World Cup Snapchat and Instagram channels. In a video message to a youth festival in Doha on Thursday he claimed the World Cup would be a platform for progress, inclusivity and tolerance. Two weeks ago, Beckham, donning dark sunglasses, posed alongside the British sculptor Hugo Dalton and his installation of golden goal posts on Doha’s Lusail City Marina.
In a jarring contrast, Human Rights Watch reported just a few days before the sunny photoshoot on the suffering of gay and transgender people who said they had been detained as recently as October in an underground prison in Doha’s Al Dafna district, six miles south of the golden posts, where they had been variously verbally abused, slapped, kicked and punched until they bled. One woman said she lost consciousness.
But Beckham, contrary to the pet name Golden Balls given to him by his wife in the innocent days of 2008, when he could do no wrong, has been the central target of the opprobrium.
Back in 2002 Beckham posed for the cover of Attitude, the gay magazine, and subsequently made the undeniably pioneering statement in a game riddled with homophobia that he was “honoured to have the tag of gay icon”.
The distance Beckham has seemingly travelled in the last two decades might account for much of the vehemence of the backlash coming his way.
The relationship with Qatar, a country with which he has longstanding links from his time as a player at the French club, Paris Saint-Germain, owned by Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani, the emir of Qatar, now arguably presents the biggest risk to the Beckham brand since his talent and “curtains” haircut caught the public attention with an audacious halfway-line goal against Wimbledon in 1996 in the red of Manchester United.
Piara Powar, the director of Fare, an anti-discrimination group that has an arrangement with Fifa to post monitors in the World Cup stadiums in Qatar, said it had pleaded behind the scenes without success for the country’s supreme committee, in charge of the event, to make a public statement welcoming LGBTQ+ people to the football.
“They were prepared to say some things off the record but not to do anything publicly,” Powar said of conversations that had carried on up to October. Judgments would be made, he suggested, about Beckham’s decision to maintain his link.
“Some of the things that people like David Beckham are learning is that human rights are universal and non-negotiable,” he said. “I have no doubt that the LGBTI community in western Europe will see him as somehow a traitor or someone who used to be an ally but no longer is.”
The comedian Joe Lycett said this week that he would put £10,000 of his own money into a shredder if Beckham did not end his deal with Qatar. Picking up his award for man of the year at the Attitude awards, the world’s only out top-tier footballer, Josh Cavallo, from Australia, told the audience: “Take that, David Beckham,” before appealing for him to speak out about LGBTQ+ rights in Qatar.
Beckham said this week: “Qatar dreamed of bringing the World Cup to a place that it had never been before, but that it wouldn’t be enough just to achieve things on the pitch. The pitch would be a platform for progress.”
“Despite Qatar being a sexist, homophobic and racist dictatorship, he’s reportedly described it as ‘perfection’,” he said. “Beckham was once a LGBT+ ally and icon but no more. He’s taken his 30 pieces of silver. Putting money before principles, he seems driven solely by pure greed.”
But could this really be terminal for the Beckham brand?
Andy Milligan, the author of Brand It Like Beckham, a book chronicling the building of the image of the boy from Leytonstone, has his doubts.
Beckham had maintained his appeal across the demographics for over a quarter of century, he said, despite episodes that would have surely killed off other celebrity figures.
There was the alleged affair in 2004 with his personal assistant Rebecca Loos (denied by Beckham), the petulant red card in the 1998 World Cup tie with Argentina that some speculate cost England the tournament, and then, perhaps most dangerous of all, the leak of emails published by European newspapers, in spite of an injunction, in 2017, which Beckham had railed in foul-mouthed terms to an aide about his lack of a knighthood.
This is not even the first time he has put his name in the hands of an authoritarian regime. Beckham became China’s global soccer ambassador in 2013 at a time when the game there had been tarnished by a match-fixing scandal and an exodus of internationals from the country’s Super League. “This is a wonderful sport that inspires people across the world and brings families together, so I’m relishing the opportunity of introducing more fans to the game,” Beckham said then.
Despite it all, the Beckham brand keeps going – and growing. The latest accounts of Beckham’s company DB Ventures mention deals with Adidas, the video game company Electronic Arts, the watch brand Tudor and the scotch whisky Haig Club. In 2020, the company posted an after-tax profit of £10.5m on a turnover of £11.3m. This for a man who retired from football in 2013.
“He has tended to be resilient because there is an awful lot of goodwill in the bank towards his brand,” said Milligan. “It comes back to character. Because for so many years he represented a lot of things people value: dedication, patriotism towards England, his work around children [as a Unicef goodwill ambassador] and the fact that everywhere around the world he is liked.
“Despite the fact that he is incredibly famous, he has a down-to-earth feeling about him. He queues for 13 hours to see the Queen’s coffin, he retains the Essex accent, he comes across humbly and that appeals to people around the world, particularly in Asia where humility is highly valued.”
Beckham offered a combination of “football, fashion and feelgood” – and his “smartness is often underestimated”, Milligan said.
He said: “Maybe most importantly he has an ability to recognise and take very good advice. So I think both him and Victoria have made smart decisions on who they have had around them to advise them. Qatar bans beer from World Cup stadiums after 11th-hour U-turn
“His very first choice of agent before Simon Fuller [former manager of the Spice Girls], when he was on loan at Preston North End, was Alan Shearer’s agent.”
This February, Beckham shuffled his team. Longstanding friend and business manager Dave Gardner stepped aside, and the US giant Authentic Brands Group (ABG) paid $269m (£225m) to take a controlling stake in DB Ventures. “Our shared vision makes ABG the ideal strategic partner to help unlock the full potential of my brand and business,” Beckham said.
“The question is, if there is an effect how long will it last?” Milligan said of the impact of Qatar on its star name. “If you look at Beckham’s history, the show moves on. We have very short memories nowadays. We are highly distractible, with short attention spans and a new story will emerge very quickly after the World Cup.” Some may think it is all over for brand Beckham but there is every chance he will bounce right back.
The midterm culture war over plant-based meat Nebraska’s next governor made his fortune in bacon and racked up pollution complaints along the way. Now he’s turning his sights on alternative meat.
Last week, Nebraskans elected Republican businessman Jim Pillen to be the state’s next governor. It’s no surprise he won: Nebraska has picked a Republican in every gubernatorial election since 1998. But what made Pillen’s campaign so peculiar — and alarming to those who care about animal welfare and climate change — is that no other political candidate has campaigned so vehemently against veggie burgers and soy milk.
Throughout his campaign, Pillen vowed to “stand up to radicals who want to use red tape and fake meat to put Nebraska out of business,” and promised to work to pass laws that ban plant-based food producers from using words like “meat” and “milk” on their packaging.
While Pillen has a financial interest in such a ban — he runs Pillen Family Farms, the nation’s 16th largest pork company — “fake meat,” or more accurately, plant-based meat, currently poses little actual threat to Nebraska’s farmers, as it accounts for just 1.4 percent of US meat retail sales. Plant-based milks like oat milk or almond milk have captured a much bigger share of the dairy aisle — around 16 percent — but the dairy industry says it’s a minor factor in the decline of milk sales.
Pillen also has a financial interest in maintaining Nebraska’s hands-off regulatory landscape: His giant hog operations have been trailed by air and water pollution complaints since the 1990s. Pillen’s campaign did not respond to an interview request for this story.
The real aim, it seems, of his vitriol toward bean burgers — a tactic increasingly deployed by Republican politicians — is to ensnare plant-based meat into the culture war and further cleave an already divided electorate.
Real meat is for real Americans, while the stuff made from plants is touted by “coastal billionaires,” Pillen’s campaign asserted. The same message lit up right-wing media last year when the Daily Mail speculated — with zero evidence — that President Joe Biden’s climate change plan might limit red meat consumption. (What became the Inflation Reduction Act, which passed a year and a half later, didn’t touch meat; ensuring an abundant, cheap meat supply is a goal that still has bipartisan consensus in the US.)
The message resurfaced this summer when Georgia Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene nonsensically warned that the government was going to surveil and “zap” people who eat cheeseburgers. Texas Rep. Ronny Jackson, who served as the White House physician for five years and who won reelection last week along with Greene, tweeted “I will NEVER eat one of those FAKE burgers made in a LAB. Eat too many and you’ll turn into a SOCIALIST DEMOCRAT. Real BEEF for me!!”
Alarmism over imagined threats to meat consumption is nothing new. In 2012, an internal USDA newsletter about the agency’s sustainability efforts mentioned Meatless Mondays, which prompted pushback from congressional Republicans. But the sparring over meat has escalated in recent years, which is terrible news for the planet. Leading environmental researchers warn that even if we do stop all fossil fuel use, we’re still cooked if we don’t change what we eat.
Agriculture accounts for a quarter of global greenhouse gas emissions, with meat, dairy, and eggs making up the bulk of those emissions. And farmers won’t be spared from the effects of a changing climate. Extreme weather events, like droughts, wildfires, and floods, can destroy harvests and kill farmed animals. Rising temperatures and changing ecosystems lower livestock productivity, reduce crop yields, and degrade nutritional quality.
Dragging plant-based meat into the culture war could also hurt Nebraska farmers’ bottom line in another way: The state is devoting more acreage to crops that go into plant-based meat. Late last year, the ingredient company Puris, which subcontracts for Beyond Meat, told the Independentit had increased pea production in Nebraska by 81 percent from 2019 to 2021 and expected further growth in the state. (The farmer interviewed also raises cattle and joked that he’s grabbing “both of these markets.”)
Nebraska is also a leader in growing beans, a longtime staple of plant-based products.
Johnathan Hladik, policy director for the Center for Rural Affairs — a Nebraska-based nonprofit that works to improve quality of life for small farmers and rural citizens — said farmers in the state don’t see plant-based meat as a significant threat. “It might be a humorous line in a conversation or a political punchline that gets good laughs and cheers,” he told me. “I don’t hear anybody having serious conversations about it.” Hladik’s family farms corn, soybeans, and cattle, and he raises animals himself that he sells directly to consumers.
Governor-elect Jim Pillen at the Nebraska State Capitol in Lincoln on January 18. Grant Schulte/AP
According to Graham Christensen, a corn and soybean farmer and the head of a renewable energy company in Nebraska, plant-based meat and other issues invoked by Pillen — like state agriculture regulation, the EPA’s clean water rule, and the Biden administration’s conservation programs — are trotted out as boogeymen to distract from problems wrought by large meat producers like the governor-elect.
“This is a psychological scheme that has been deployed over and over on good rural Nebraska people and beyond, in order to allow business to go forward as is,” said Christensen, who isn’t a fan of plant-based meat but agrees the US needs to cut back on meat consumption.
What most worries farmers and advocates like Hladik and Christensen, more than the rise of plant-based meat, is the rapid consolidation of the meat and feed industries, which has squeezed out smaller farmers, as well as the scourge of air and water pollution across the Midwest that’s been caused largely by industrialized agriculture. Pillen, who has inveighed against “environmental crazies” and “the assault on modern agriculture,” is unlikely to address either.
Pillen’s not wrong that what he calls modern agriculture, a euphemism for large-scale, industrialized animal agriculture, is under attack. But in Nebraska, it’s not necessarily from the specter of plant-based meat or the Biden administration, which has largely taken the same hands-off approach to agricultural pollution that Pillen advocates. Rather, it’s often from Nebraskans angry that their state government has known about its water pollution problem for decades and has only allowed it to get worse.
“Don’t tell me how to farm”
Nebraska is home to around 100 million farmed animals, fattened up with a lot of corn and soybeans. An even bigger proportion of the state’s corn production goes to make ethanol that’s blended with gasoline, which researchers say is an inefficient use of land. Most farmers apply nitrogen-based fertilizers to make the corn and soybeans grow as big and fast as possible, which means they usually need less land to grow more feed than organic farmers — a good thing. But the synthetic fertilizer comes with a steep public health toll: Nitrogen from fertilizer leaks out as nitrate into groundwater, which some 85 percent of Nebraskans rely on for drinking water. Researchers have found that areas with high nitrate levels have higher rates of childhood cancer and birth defects, and high nitrate levels are linked to colorectal cancer and thyroid disease.
Rain, as well as water used to irrigate crops, also carries nitrogen off the land and into rivers and streams, which can kill off fish and pollute waterways.
The other major source of nitrogen pollution comes from farmed animals themselves. Farmers spread their manure onto crops as a natural fertilizer, but some of it — like the synthetic stuff — leaches into waterways and groundwater.
A farmer applies fertilizer to a field near Gretna, Nebraska. Nati Harnik/AP
According to a damning recent investigation by the Flatwater Free Press, 59 of Nebraska’s 500 or so public water systems have violated the EPA’s nitrate limit of 10 parts per million since 2010 — a limit some researchers argue is still unsafe for children.
There are some practical, win-win solutions that Christensen and Hladik would like to see farmers take up to reduce nitrogen pollution, like planting trees and shrubs between cropland and waterways to prevent nitrate runoff, and cover-cropping — planting certain crops alongside corn and soy that can absorb nitrogen or reduce reliance on fertilizer. Silvia Secchi, a natural resource economist at the University of Iowa, told me the benefits of these practices will be limited because they’re voluntary and most farmers will only employ them if they get subsidies, which come and go.
Secchi, Christensen, and Hladik all agree that what’s really needed is regulatory activity and enforcement, such as improving water pollution monitoring and testing, permitting livestock farms so they’re further from homes and schools, fining repeat polluters, and requiring farmers to better manage manure.
But given the outsized political influence meat and animal feed producers wield in the state, it’s a lot to hope for, even at the local level. Nebraska has 23 natural resource districts, or NRDs — local governmental bodies made up of elected boards with the goal of improving water quality (among other issues). One elected NRD member, who wished to remain anonymous out of fear of retaliation, told me most NRDs are stacked with farmers or others involved in agriculture who resist reform.
“I hear this almost every board meeting: ‘Don’t tell me how to farm,’” they told me. The NRDs also have little to no enforcement authority: they can issue cease-and-desist orders that, if violated, can result in fines. The Nebraska Department of Environment and Energy (NDEE) has more authority, but Hladik said it’s underfunded and understaffed.
Even if it had people and money, it would need a mandate from the governor to clean up Nebraska’s wells and waterways. So far, that hasn’t come to pass; neither the NDEE nor any of Nebraska’s 23 NRDs have ever issued a cease-and-desist order or fine for excessive nitrogen fertilizer or manure application, according to the Flatwater Free Press. Meanwhile, cities, towns, and individuals have spent millions to treat water.
Water quality will likely worsen in the coming years, as Costco recently set up hundreds of barns and an enormous slaughter complex in the state to raise and process nearly 100 million chickens each year.
The Nebraska Association of Resources Districts did not respond to an interview request for this story. NDEE, responding to a request for comment, said in an emailed statement that it is “committed to an integrated approach to nutrient reduction that incorporates science-based and cost-effective targeted management practices” and that it “adheres to state statutory requirements and enacts regulatory authority through the department’s rules and regulations.”
Piglets on a farm in Nebraska. Getty Images/iStockphoto/Kelli Jo
Pillen, who has been on the receiving end of numerous state and citizen complaints against his business, benefits from Nebraska’s weak regulatory environment. In 1997, he received a complaint from the state over odors from one of his facilities. In 2000, a group of 18 plaintiffs sued over the stench of his hog operations, reporting a “musty hog shit smell” that “chokes you.” One woman said she felt she was a prisoner in her house, while another plaintiff complained that they couldn’t spend any time outside with their children and grandchildren. In 2013, a group of more than 100 people opposed new hog barns Pillen wanted to set up in Butler County, and two years later Pillen was cited for water pollution in another county.
“It’s really like putting the fox in charge of the henhouse to elect a guy like that,” said Secchi. The NRD member I spoke to used the same phrase when I asked them what they think of a Pillen governorship, as did a farmer.
Pillen and his family have received at least hundreds of thousands of dollars in federal subsidies from 1995 to 2019, according to the Environmental Working Group’s farm subsidies database.
We can’t afford to drag meat into the culture war
Pillen has entered the political arena during a moment in which agricultural policy is returning to the national political stage; President Biden even mentioned cover crops in his first address to Congress. This is a welcome turn of events. But agriculture is full of counterintuitive trade-offs, and blanket statements made by red-meat conservatives like Pillen, and sometimes by progressive advocates of organic agriculture, only serve to degrade the discourse on a complex, critical issue.
With a global population hitting 8 billion people on a heating planet, we need to be able to ask why we’re growing so much corn to produce so much meat — and ethanol — in the first place, without the conversation devolving to pithy campaign slogans.
America’s meat consumption, at more than 250 pounds per person per year, is simply unsustainable at current levels. If we raised fewer animals in a more ecologically sound fashion, and opted for more plant-based meat, or occasionally swapped meat for Nebraska-grown beans, we wouldn’t need to grow so much animal feed that pollutes waterways and endangers rural communities. It’d be far easier to manage the mountains of waste generated in the US each year by nearly 10 billion animals that makes rural life increasingly unbearable for some. Less meat doesn’t mean rejecting agriculture, but rather rethinking what we devote precious land to — a rethinking that could also help struggling farmers economically diversify, as Christensen told me.
It’s all but guaranteed Pillen would’ve won without his polarizing comments on meat alternatives and his anti-regulatory ethos. But the culture war-ification of meat — intended to shore up rural identity and needlessly divide voters — is something to keep an eye on as the climate footprint of what we eat becomes increasingly impossible to ignore, and essential for policymakers to address.
Crypto Couple's Charity Gave Almost Nothing...to Charity
"My life is devoted to this," Gisele Bündchen said about her and Tom Brady's charity, which donated less than 0.1% of their worth over more than a decade.
The public has been learning a lot about Tom Brady and ex-wife Gisele Bündchen’s financials lately, thanks to their dedicated PR team pushing out intel on the couple’s assets amidst their divorce. The former-turned-current NFL quarterback has a net worth of about $250 million and the supermodel boasts an estimated $400 million to her name. But despite such impressive wealth, the couple’s nonprofit the Luz Foundation managed to squeeze out less than 0.1% of their worth to charity between the years 2007 and 2019.
“My life isdevoted to this,” Bündchen told the Sydney Morning Herald in 2015 regarding the foundation that executed a whopping $300 donation to a Costa Rican environmental group in 2018. No offense, babe, but try to devote a little harder next time.
The majority of donations in that decade were to yoga and meditation groups, including a $25,000 donation to the David Lynch Foundation in 2017. (Psst, celebrities, yoga and meditation are great and all but I beg you to consider donating some money to feeding and housing people.) In total, the Luz Foundation gave out $640,402 between 2007 and 2019. That amount, if I were to generously round up, is 0.1% of their net worth.
Alongside the Luz Foundation, Brady has his own separate nonprofit called TB12 Foundation. The Daily Beast reported that as recently as 2020, the organization was $7 million in debt. Despite being in the red, the TB12 Foundation managed to fund Brady’s for-profit company, TB12 LLC, with over $1.6 million, making the Foundation the LLC’s biggest contractor.
This sort of philanthropic prowess must have been what landed Bündchen the gig as director of Environmental and Social Initiatives for FTX, the now-crashed crypto Ponzi scheme she and Brady peddled just earlier this year (and are now being sued for). Before she was relieved of her duties due to the entire crypto exchange collapsing, Bündchen helped FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried announce the company’s plan to donate a billion dollars to charities over the course of the next year.
Perhaps it’s ultimately a good thing that the couple either didn’t give away their net worth, because looking down the pipeline at this FTX lawsuit by scammed investors, they might need that extra cash now more than ever.
/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/71647842/Screen_Shot_2022_07_23_at_6.26.39_PM.0.png)
/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/71644667/neb03.0.jpg)
Amanda Northrop/Vox:format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/24198469/AP22018680695943.jpg)
:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/24197186/AP751768963499.jpg)
:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/24197201/GettyImages_831729236.jpg)
.png)
Comments