by Dan Frey
(referred to only by numbers, not by names).
The ones that we choose will be the ones we are “meant” to choose.
Trust the process.
Also, fire Carrie already, will you?
Leila won’t come out and say it but I will.
—A
REPLY
Bro I can’t fire Carrie, she’ll sue. Leave my shit alone and focus on your job.
Which is gonna be getting beta units ready for a test. Cool? We’re doing this.
EMAIL—JULY 30, 2021
From: Paolo Ventrini
To: Ben Boyce, Adhvan Chaudry
Listen Boys, the investors and I are going along with your strategy of bringing a consumer product to market. We are going along with your resistance to merging or selling with a larger conglomerate. But we cannot support a roll-out strategy this reckless. We need time to secure retail partnerships, demonstrate the soundness of our tech, get the lawsuit off our plate, and develop our supply-chain plan.
In other words, we need to slow down, take a step back, postpone any sort of public-facing beta test, and push back our release date.
TWITTER THREAD
@HEYBENBOYCE
The Future 1.0—a fully-functional TIME MACHINE that can see into the future—will be AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC on 1/1/2022. #TheFutureIsComing
@HEYBENBOYCE
Put it in your calendars! Price and specs coming soon, but know—it will be priced as a viable CONSUMER PRODUCT for EVERYONE! #TheFutureIsComing
@HEYBENBOYCE
Haters and doubters beware—revolutionary tech comin your way! #TheFutureIsComing
EMAIL REPLY
From: Ben Boyce
To: Paolo Ventrini, Adhvan Chaudry, Carrie Chan
Yo Paolo, appreciate your concern and all, but tell the investors to get on board, the Future train is on the MOVE!
Ben
CHAPTER 16
EMAIL—AUGUST 5, 2021
From: The Future Admin
To: (undisclosed recipients)
Dear User,
Congratulations! You have been selected as a Beta Tester for The Future 1.0. Your usage period of 60 days will be remotely monitored, as a way to troubleshoot the effectiveness of the product.
SECURITY
As you are no doubt aware from the selection process you have been through, security is of tantamount importance. Please review the attached NDA. If you wish to have a lawyer review it as well, there is a separate NDA your lawyer will need to sign first (inform your lawyer that yes, this is in addition to normal attorney-client provisions). The provisions of this NDA we would highlight are—
- No one should know that you are a Beta Tester. This includes significant others, family members, friends, coworkers, etc.
- You may not share any information with anyone that you may have only credibly obtained through using the Beta Machine.
- You may not publicly discuss usage of the Beta Machine, or publicly disseminate any information obtained therein.
- You are required to protect the physical security of the Beta Machine. If you have been selected, then your home has already been inspected for reasonable security, but be advised you are not permitted under any circumstances to relocate the Beta Machine.
USAGE
Please review the attached Beta Tester Agreement in detail. We would highlight the following salient points, which are nonnegotiable:
- All of your usage will be monitored.
- You may not engage in financial speculation based on information obtained through the Beta Machine.
- You consent to usage parameters that may be changed, without prior notice, during the course of the Beta Testing period.
We look forward to having you on board the Beta Team!
Ben Boyce
CEO of The Future
EMAIL—AUGUST 12, 2021
From: Adhvan Chaudry
To: Ben Boyce
B—
One of the Beta Testers killed himself.
Apparently, he had recently been diagnosed with ALS.
Within 30 minutes of taking his unit home, he Googled himself, using the Beta unit.
The outcome: similar to the Nikolai situation.
First thing that came up was his own obituary.
Probably he was trying to see his expected longevity, given the disease…
but it was his fate to cut it short.
This is terrible.
—A
REPLY
Are you fucking SERIOUS? Did we not see this coming in the Report that you looked up on the Prototype? This seems like exactly the type of thing we should have known about.
REPLY
B—
This incident was not in the report,
and the users (in the data set we have) are all anonymized.
I’m wondering if this is going off the rails.
Either (A) the technology is becoming problematic
or (B) The Beta Report I viewed did not include this anomaly.
Do we need to shut this down?
—A
REPLY
Hey man, relax, no need to shut it down. We’re on top of it. Whether you meant to or not, what you’re suggesting is actually a good idea, on multiple levels. Meaning, maybe this happened/was always going to happen, but was not “meant” to be included in the Beta Report, bc it was never supposed to be part of the Beta Test.
We had plenty of backup applicants who were ready to step in. Since it was a same-day incident, we swapped out User 53, so now have somebody else in his place. I’ve got a team moving the Beta Unit over there already.
REPLY
B—
Are you kidding me?
I was not suggesting anything, certainly not that we just swap out a deceased Beta Tester.
This has to be part of the study.
—A
REPLY
Listen dude, I know it’s really sad what happened there, and we’re not just gonna forget about this. But we weren’t about to get any good data from that user anymore, and we need good data. Plus, let’s be honest, this is probably a situation like what happened with Nikolai. A suicidal, problematic individual, who was unfortunately gravitating toward our tech, likely because of his suicidal ideation.
EXCERPT FROM CONGRESSIONAL HEARING—DECEMBER 1, 2021
REP. MARSHA CALLOWAY (R-IN): Mr. Boyce, you say that you have a firm handle on this technology. But the incidents surrounding the beta were very troubling.
BOYCE: Overall, the beta test was a huge success. We weren’t trying to cover anything up. The swap-in that we did, I acknowledge, we should’ve been more transparent. But scientifically, it was reasonable. We did it entirely to try to get as much good data as we possibly could. The trials were prohibitively expensive.
REP. MARSHA CALLOWAY (R-IN): The suicide was a troubling event, but it wasn’t the only problem. Reports indicate that approximately eighteen of your one hundred beta users violated the agreement they signed and attempted to speculatively profit from its usage.
BOYCE: With all due respect, yes, but that also indicates a fundamental flaw with the design of the beta process. A problem which will be solved, obviously, by just making the technology available to everyone.
REP. MARSHA CALLOWAY (R-IN): That hardly seems obvious to me.
BOYCE: Look—imagine it’s, like, the 1800s. And there’s a railroad strike, and shipments of apples from California are gonna be held up. That means apple stocks are gonna tank the next day, right? Now, if there’s ten guys who get that information, who have access to telegram technol
ogy—they sell their stocks, right? They have an unfair advantage, while the rest of us get screwed on our apple stock, because we don’t have access to the same info. But, let’s say everyone has that information technology. The newspapers have it, and they print it on the front page. Then we’ve got a level playing field.
The beta test—that shows us what happens if ten people know something nobody else does. It’s human nature, they act on it. And that’s what will happen if you restrict this technology. But open it to the whole world, we all have access to the same info.
REP. MARSHA CALLOWAY (R-IN): Then why even create it? If everyone will have access to the same information.
BOYCE: If you have to ask that question…I don’t even really know how to talk to you. All I can say is, I’m sure you weren’t an early adopter of the iPhone. I bet you were looking over your friend’s shoulder saying, Why would I even want my email on my phone? But I bet your iPhone was the first thing you looked at this morning.
REP. MARSHA CALLOWAY (R-IN): Mr. Boyce, I would advise you to watch your tone when addressing members of this committee. We will be considering legislation in the coming weeks which could make your product illegal in this country.
BOYCE: Oh, that’s a great plan. Then, only every other country in the world will have access to the most important info tech revolution since the Internet. Really forward-thinking.
REP. MARSHA CALLOWAY (R-IN): I would like to propose a motion to consider Mr. Boyce in Contempt of Congress, and to—
BOYCE: Wait, wait, wait. I’m sorry, OK? Senator Calloway, I apologize, I am simply passionate about my product.
REP. MARSHA CALLOWAY (R-IN): Tread lightly, then, Mr. Boyce. And I would like to point out one more thing. Which is that, before you talk about your position as so self-evidently undeniable, maybe you should consider why your own co-founder no longer seemed to agree with it.
BOYCE: Well…there were mitigating factors, in terms of my co-founder. At that time. He was starting to become…less than maximally reliable, in certain ways, with respect to his mental health.
REP. MARSHA CALLOWAY (R-IN): That wasn’t the only problem with the beta test though, was it?
BOYCE: …Yes, we did encounter a security issue.
EMAIL—SEPTEMBER 2, 2021
From: Alice Muncy
To: Ben Boyce, Adhvan Chaudry
Mr. Boyce and Mr. Chaudry—
Hi, this is Beta Tester 19. I tried calling the support line at first, but then I thought based on your orientation talk and given the nature of my problem that you wouldn’t actually want me to discuss with anyone else yet, so I’m writing to you and hoping you can call me back please when you get this.
It appears that my Beta Unit has been stolen.
REPLY
From: Ben Boyce
Alice—good move reaching out, thank you, sorry I’ve been in meetings back-to-back. Please sit tight we will be there in person in less than an hour. DO NOT contact police or discuss w any other TF personnel.
EMAIL
From: Ben Boyce
To: Adhvan Chaudry
Hey man, where you been all day? Dealing with some serious shit on this missing Beta Unit. I went out to her spot in person with Kevin from Security, didn’t take anyone else, and Kevin is cool he can keep a lid on this. He thinks our exposure is limited and we can keep this under wraps.
Question on my mind is—how did someone find out the name and info on one of our Testers? Thought we were all buttoned up here. And maybe an even better question, coming up YET AGAIN, is this—why did we not see this coming?
REPLY
B—
The only reason I can think of for why we didn’t see this coming is because of the successful cover-up.
The one that we have not done yet, but inevitably will do.
Unless you want to explore the possibility that doing so is morally wrong.
Unless you want to consciously try to break us from this path.
—A
REPLY
I don’t think it’s wrong, it’s just good business. And it’s not a cover-up, it’s damage control.
Look, I’m all over it. Kevin connected me with Watermark, they’re this private investigation/security firm that specializes in corporate cases like this, expensive af but honestly the shit they can do is pretty fucking legit. They’re helping track down the Beta Unit and also getting into keeping it quiet, data management, all that.
Also, based on their rec, we’re going to pull the plug on the Beta Test a little early. I mean, we’re Day 28, so 30 is right around the corner, and it’s credible to say 30 was always the goal. Should have all remaining units back and accounted for within 3 days.
My question for you is—what’s our exposure here? We’ve got a Prototype that’s in the wind now, no clue where it is, what does that mean for us?
REPLY
B—
I see three distinct possibilities…
Which I will enumerate in increasing order of We-Are-Fuckedness.
1) The burglary was random. In that case it is highly unlikely the thief will ever figure out how to operate the transtemporal functionality, and we’re essentially in the clear. W.A.F. score: 1.
2) The burglary was targeted for personal gain. Someone is now using it to get rich in the stock market, win the lottery, etc. This will likely, eventually, be found out and blow back on us. W.A.F score: 4.
3) The burglary was targeted for corporate gain. If that is the case, it was no doubt undertaken by some party that intends to reverse-engineer the Beta Unit and build one of their own. W.A.F. score: 8.
In terms of options, there aren’t many.
—A
REPLY
Hey man, we’re on it. Kevin says the Watermark guys are the best in their business and they’re leaving no stone unturned here, it should just be a matter of time before we get to the bottom of this.
REPLY
B—
I’m sure they have plenty of experience tracking down stolen time machines.
In the meantime, I have a new wrinkle to make you aware of.
Check out the attached, which I pulled from the Prototype this morning—
Quoted Text:
((THE FUTURE LAUNCHES STRONG IN U.S.
After months of hype and rampant speculation, The Future stores around the country opened on New Year’s Day to lines around the block and strong sales. Insiders were expecting solid numbers, since over 40,000 people had pre-ordered the Future 1 units online, which were available Sunday for pickup and shipping. Since the company reported estimates that another 50,000 units had sold in its 21 locations, it’s clear that expectations have been met or exceeded.))
In case it’s not clear…
That is from the same article we shared with the investors.
But the sales figures are slightly lower.
And the number of stores has dropped by one.
In other words—for the first time—we have discrepancies.
—A
REPLY
Hey man, discrepancies of one store and a couple thousand units don’t seem like that big a deal in the grand scheme of things, and in light of what we’re dealing with here. Namely a STOLEN UNIT, and the prospect that our entire business could unravel.
REPLY
B—
Our business is selling machines that see the future,
accurately and infallibly.
If they don’t do that anymore…
if these Discrepancies persist, possibly even increase…
we might as well be in the horoscope business.
—A
EXCERPT FROM CONGRESSIONAL HEARING—DECEMBER 1, 2021
/>
SEN. DANA BOUCHER (D-NV): Mr. Boyce, what is the next question I’m going to ask you?
BOYCE: Uh…No idea.
SEN. DANA BOUCHER (D-NV): But this is a hearing of public record. Surely, in an effort to prepare for it, you would have been able to access the transcript of our questions, and of your own testimony.
BOYCE: Yes.
SEN. DANA BOUCHER (D-NV): Then let me ask you a direct question, and I would remind you that you are under oath here. Did you obtain and view a copy of the transcript of this hearing?
BOYCE: …I did.
(AUDIBLE MURMURING)
SEN. DANA BOUCHER (D-NV): So. You should be able to answer, what am I going to ask you next?
BOYCE: I am not able to recall at this time.
SEN. DANA BOUCHER (D-NV): How about this, then: is your colleague, Mr. Chaudry, going to join us at any point today?
BOYCE: I am not certain.
SEN. DANA BOUCHER (D-NV): A detail like that would have to be salient in your recollection of those materials. Is Mr. Chaudry going to be here?
BOYCE: Look, the way I saw it…Adhi did show up. From the beginning. I read a version of this testimony that he was in. And…honestly, what’s happening today…it’s not supposed to happen like this.
SEN. DANA BOUCHER (D-NV): “Not supposed to”? Interesting. So then you admit, here and now, that your technology is not as infallible as you previously represented?
