skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
"because our algo will finish its calculation overnight and give a final number in the morning"

Doesn't inspire confidence.
Soo...anybody have a spare invite available?
https://www.euromoney.com/article/b1320xkhl0443w/naked-short...
The general trend in these posts (and tweet storms) is the same - pick any technology and then preach the wisdom of not using it because "You're not Google", or "You won't need it". It's a great tactic as it puts the speaker in a position of judgement, and they can freely share their opinions on some architecture, without getting any pushback from the creators of said architecture. Quite a one-sided affair that makes you look like you know everything. It's, frankly, elitist.

This entire article can be surmised by "You don't need Kafka because the throughput seems to be low". To which the retort can be many: they might be building for the future - to integrate more systems, they might have fan-out use cases, they might want to have a log to replay in case of disasters - so on and so forth. All well documented and very valid use cases of Kafka.

But of course, "You don't need Kafka" because <reasons>.
The way that WSB has latched onto Melvin as their enemy is to their detriment. It was never about killing Melvin capital, or at least, it shouldn't have been. It ought to have been about the ridiculous short interest on the stock, regardless of who was funding it. Whether or not Melvin specifically has covered their shorts is irrelevant to how the short interest as a percentage of float has changed in the past week.

https://twitter.com/ihors3 is the source to pay attention to, and he's saying (within the past hour) that collectively, the shorts have been largely covered. It's going to be bloody tomorrow.

... Either that, or magical meme energy is going to defy reason once again. Who knows.
I mean, the obvious play is to short the stock now. Advertising that they're out helps cool the temperature of the storm so they're hoping to capture some value on the way down is my guess.
How to Start a Starup
The disincentive that tech consulting has is that jobs (at least in my area) were usually bid at fixed price.

I have no idea if that's the way larger firms do it (would expect not).

Consequently, profit = contract price - consultant hours. Every bad happened from minimizing the latter.

Even if you do straight up billable hours with the client, your time was typically scheduled 1-2 projects in advance. This lead to being prematurely (in terms of things being "done") rolled off a project, onto a new one, and finishing / supporting the first from your hotel after-hours.

This was in a pretty cowboy area. I imagine different parts of technical consulting behave differently.

But yes, MVP quality code seems to be a constant. I saw that delivered from a top-tier technical consulting firm (ML solution) to a T100 customer.
All: please don't take threads like this on generic tangents, especially not generic flamewar tangents, including programming language/framework flamewar tangents. Those are repetitive and tedious. We want interesting, curious discussion. That usually comes from engaging with the specifics of the article.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
Because actual delivery does not happen until settlement time three days later. The seller has until then to acquire the shares.

Naked shorting is illegal. To short the shares the seller only has to perform a “locate” first. That involves contacting someone that has the shares and is willing to lend them. Skipping the locate step is illegal. They just don’t have to actually borrow them until delivery.

Additionally, if the locate fails to materialize then it’s the sellers responsibility to borrow them from someone else before delivery. If not, that leads to a fail to deliver which locks up further transactions for the seller until it’s resolved.
Using Git to manage configuration files
Not necessarily. As long as the borrower commits to borrow the stock at a determined point in the future which the broker legitimately deems should have borrow liquidity (availability of shares to borrow), the short sale is not naked.

And interestingly enough, if this transaction occurs in good faith and for unforeseen reasons there is no borrow liquidity at the agreed upon time, a fail to deliver will occur despite the short sale not being naked.
Edit: This is probably wrong.

The funny thing is that the money Citadel makes off of Robinhood is basically front running RH trades. If those trades are for GME, Citadel has to choose between:

- getting their front running revenue while increasing the price and making things worse for shorts (which I'm sure Melvin still has, despite their PR)

- foregoing their RH revenue to not exacerbate the situation for shorts

Pick your poison.
Selling a share without owning it first.
I really like Taylor Lorenz, and I appreciate that someone is willing to take tiktok trends seriously besides marketing agents. She must take her DMs really seriously and be getting a lot of pitches to be posting something like this. Is is true that that her stories do mostly center around trends, and her pieces on individuals are nearly always about superstars.
If curious see also

2018 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16075933
Would anyone happen to have a screenshot of the web share experience on Windows? Is it also on for OSX?

The API made a lot of sense to use on mobile - for example to send an SMS. You need to use apps to share. Bringing it to desktop, it may actually be less usable than just putting social share buttons directly on the page. I don't know a lot of people that use the OS-level apps on desktops (e.g. contact sync or logging into facebook). Does this end up a glorified `mailto` button for most people?
> What makes Perl or Clojure such fun languages to work with

... while you're writing a small program by yourself ...

> is they don't impose structure on you. You can do whatever the hell you want.

You mean, there is nothing _preventing you_ from doing whatever the hell you want. That's not the same thing.
That can be done with bitcoin too. Just send the third party the money to forward on or send back after 3 days.

You can build more complex schemes where the third party can't just keep the money for themselves too.
They could, but it's common (and not suspicious) for an investor involved in a public fracas to publicly reveal they've exited their position. Bill Ackman did something similar with Herbalife: https://www.investopedia.com/news/billionaire-bill-ackman-du...
We were just talking about privacy, in that sense I think Samsung is roughly at the same level (considering it can't get much worse than Google :) ).

I think Google is doing a good job with their Pixel phones indeed in terms of security, though they need longer support IMO. Samsung seems to just call everything 'knox' but not really specify what exactly they're doing. So from a security point of view I agree.
As I wrote on another thread, for an individual, making money on content that's not connected to a company making money on products/services (or at least getting funded to do so) is really tough.There are exceptions of course. But they're the 1%. (To be generous.)

And I'm not sold on any of these platforms as personal income streams as complements to people making money elsewhere. Medium looked attractive for this for a time and then it didn't. Personally I write for specific outlets and do the odd thing that doesn't fit on my personal blog. (Mostly it's connected to my day job.)
Dimensions of the Khufu Pyramid
Firecracker snapshots to device mapper could be pretty cool.

We don't do much with snapshot/restore but we do a _lot_ with device mapper. It's pretty badass.
Ask HN: How to find a new job if I'm bad at leetcode style interview questions?
I've been a software engineer for a decade now, with nearly all of that time at VMware where I've been consistently recognized by my peers, tech leads, and managers as an engineer that writes good clean code (as well as some other positive attributes, but no companies appear interested in anything beyond coding skills when it comes to hiring). Yet despite writing (and reviewing) countless lines of actual production code for a very non-trivial product I'm unable to solve the types of problems I encounter in interviews.

Of course I've tried practicing on leetcode and similar sites and watching youtube videos of problems I've particularly struggled with but nothing seems to help. Over the last couple years I've bombed interviews at Google, Microsoft, Facebook, and Amazon (the first two I made it to the onsites, the last two I didn't even get that far). Anyone have suggestions beyond "just practice more" or "watch more vids"?
A lot of calls will be "covered" by whomever wrote the option initially, meaning for each contract they wrote, they hold 100 shares of the underlying security as collateral. I don't know the percentage and my Google skills are failing me, but perhaps someone more familiar with the industry can comment on the ratio of covered v. naked calls.

I've written cash-secured puts and covered calls a decent amount as an individual investor, the worst thing that happens is you end up buying something for more than it's worth or selling something for less than it's worth. However, it rarely goes wrong the first time and you've made premium from other options many times over on the same security. If you look up the Wheel or Triple Income options strategy that goes into the specifics of it. It works pretty well for high-volume, stable stocks that you want to own anyway.
This specific distinction doesn't really make any sense in Europe.
It's not hard to find out what she writes about:

https://www.nytimes.com/by/taylor-lorenz
It sounds devious when you put it like that, but yes. Most things in finance are compositions of credits and debits that take time to settle. The aim is to have sufficient liquidity and price accuracy that the time between executing and settling is safe, but there's always risk that things go awry before the settlement.
In one of the comments Ihor said the algorithm will be running overnight to get a better idea of the actual number...

Is it actually plausible that an algorithm running on presumably one stock needs to run for over a day?

I believe S3, they've been reliable so far. But with this much money at stake, it wouldn't surprise me if they've been bought out to spread misinformation.
fascinating - didn't know this
"Ye" was never actually pronounced "yee". There was a letter called thorn in old English that was pronounced like "th".

I found this fact a couple years ago and I like to share it whenever possible.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thorn_(letter)#Modern_Englis...
Windows phone is a third major player. How did that work out for us? Anything improve at all?

Facebook is not going to provide any meaningful competition to improve things. An additional player when that player is facebook is utterly meaningless to enhancing customer power at best. More likely speeds the race to the bottom of "we can get away with that" because "this is already being done by facebook and we're not doing it as much so it's fine."

The odds of looking at it and rationally thinking "I'll buy a facebook phone for its enhanced privacy compared to apple and google" are so vanishingly small they are indistinguishable from zero.

It's like choosing which crime syndicate you want to to pay protection to and thinking it's a positive thing there's a new crime syndicate with a different dress code now.

Anyway these are the companies who are right this minute, spending up big in washington to put your interests well behind theirs because you pay tax and they don't, they pay lobbying and political donations and you can't compete with that even if you were that dishonest which you probably aren't.
Bedrock Linux – a meta Linux distribution
laughs Agreed. The most interest thing I tended to do was "What looks like a good restaurant in this area?"

... did get really good at reading between the lines of Yelp / maps reviews. (Objectively, friends have since commented on it)
You should consider at least editing this post given that it has a massive inaccuracy in it, i.e. that Melvin Capital bought ads to communicate not having a position in GME. That was CNBC.
The CC0 license and the Unlicense attempt to do this with language to the effect of:

> This work is placed in the public domain.

> In regions where this is not possible, the author grants unlimited license to this work.

Unfortunately, the CC0 explicitly does not waive patent rights, the Unlicense doesn't mention patents at all, the Blue Oak Model License and Apache 2.0 don't attempt to place the work into the public domain, and 0BSD and MIT-0 neither address patents nor attempt to place the work into the public domain. None of these licenses aggressively waive all of the author's rights to their work; I wonder why there isn't a strong public-domain no-patents-or-anything-else license ?
> The real Robin Hood-esque company in this whole thing is Vanguard, who have almost certainly done more than most any other company in this space to return profits from the market to customers of all wealth ranges.

This is true but unfortunately it's one of those situations where you need money to make money and even then it's a slow multi-decade long process.

Culturally young people find themselves in something of a vice grip. We are a consumerism culture hell bent on producing and acquiring the next best thing. Patience and presence of mind over financials are diminishing skills, yet you need both of these if you intend on retiring through owning stocks.
Note that the case was designed by Rick Dickinson, who also designed the original ZX81 and ZX Spectrum decades ago.
It's fairly unusual to have companies with this sort of structure. Why would you ever buy shares in a company that doesn't pay dividends and where you can get infinitely diluted and have no control? (other than for speculative reasons)
>Save us from being protected from censoriship by Apple

The demands from privacy by Apple are right, just combine them with anti-trust measures like open APIs that break Apples walled garden down and the internet would be useable again. It'd be pretty easy to get rid of both censorship and restore people's privacy if the will was there.
And you did just that without referencing either Reddit or memes.
What’s your point? As I said:

> over the long run the set of all COVID-19-naive individuals becomes dominated by the very young (infants/toddlers), who have essentially zero risk of COVID-19 mortality.
From Go? There is the syscall package.

More generally C is just adding some conventions, like 'calling' that can be interacted with by following the rules from e.g assembly or a higher level language that can compile to compatible calls.
The Fyre Festival of Vaccine Rollouts
You do realize you are talking to someone with Ahmedi parents married in Rabwah whose forefathers belonged to Qadian? I never heard anything about CAB helping them. (and by the way, you spelled Mohajir wrong)
If the stock continues going up this week, it's that the "magical meme" energy is actually the momentum traders and various celebrities who want to keep the story going by putting more money into it. Of course, they are then likely to flip their positions for a profit before they tell their followers they've sold, leaving the fans holding the bag. Just at a more extended timeframe than you'd predict.
It also increases societal well being. The more people are trained to keep things running, fixed, and improved upon, the better.
While this is a potentially good idea to do in parallel, it is effectively impossible to reduce crime rate to literally zero, and the nature of the internet means that users can receive the same volume of malicious emails/ads and other malware vectors with fewer actors.
I don't have a good general answer; it's complex. But some specific things relevant to this story:

Market makers are allowed and expected to run naked shorts in order to ensure liquidity. We want a system where you can just buy or sell an item "into the market", and then everything will get sorted out eventually. We optimise for the case where shares can be found because it's overwhelmingly common.

Stock borrowing is routine and transparent. People often have no idea if their stock has been lent out or if they own a borrowed stock; the reason for this is because the system has been designed so it doesn't matter. Shorting is common and accepted.

The volume of transactions is enormous, and the system began to freeze up under the weight of its own paperwork in the 60s and 70s. To work around this, a policy of stock immobilization was implemented to ensure that stocks don't need to physically change hands. As a result, almost all stocks in the US are actually owned by a small, obscure partnership called Cede & Co. As the excellent writer Matt Levine wrote a while back:

> Nobody owns stock. What you own is an entitlement to stock held for you by your broker. But your broker doesn't own the stock either. What your broker owns is an entitlement to stock held for it by Cede & Co., which is a nominee of the Depository Trust Company, which is a company that is in the business of owning everyone's stock for them. This system sounds convoluted but actually makes it easy to keep track of things: If I sell stock to you, I don't have to courier over a paper share certificate, or call up the company and have it change its shareholder register. Our brokers just change some electronic entries at their DTC accounts and everything is cool.

Dematerialization has been extremely helpful, but at scale, it moves us even further away from a system that deals with concrete items. Hence, eg, Levine's hilarious story "Banks Forgot Who Was Supposed to Own Dell Shares", from which my earlier excert comes from: https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2015-07-14/banks-...

Or for another even more hilarious story (also by Levine), "Dole Food Had Too Many Shares": https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2017-02-17/dole-f...

And so forth, and so on. The system, at every level, is not one where it makes any real sense to say "the company has issued five hundred thousand shares, I own twenty of them, I keep them in a drawer in my office, look, here are the serial numbers". It's more probabilistic than that, very much by design.
If they didn't say anything, you'd think they were still shorting GME.
I don't think you should get downvoted, it's a good question. I live in Buenos Aires, and there is definitely a general perception that the country is hopeless. But for some reason we do get a fair share of immigrants from more prosperous countries such as South Korea and China. There's also a lot of people coming in from Africa, mainly Senegal from what I've heard.
"Carbon is forever."
There is no confusion on this end. You're ignoring the question that I'm asking, because the answer is unpleasant, and you're instead responding with non-answers, because looking like you're saying something when you're really saying nothing is easier.

Facts: We have evidence that Oracle doesn't care about the actual terms of GPL. We have evidence that they're willing to subject people to legal turmoil if Oracle decides they want you to pay instead of using the "free" license.
Trades aren't settled immediately. Finance runs on various forms of promises, basically.
It's really strange. Why would they openly announce that they have closed shorts and that they are sustaining damage so publicly?

My theory is that they are not only doubling down but quadrupling down everytime the stock shoots up. Gamestop has no fundamentals going for it, take a look at its other competitors in the industry, they are all gone. Neither do cases for AMC (who themselves acknowledged and WARNED investors that their operations are simply no long viable due to the pandemic).

This is probably a once in a lifetime short, they've seen the order flows from Robinhood, they have probably infiltrated r/wallstreetbets and are egging people to buy in to the "David vs Goliath" narrative which is couldn't be further removed from the truth.

Many people who are jumping in now (from all the posts asking what is a margin, or when do I sell, or even how to use a broker app) and I fear that people are walking into a clever trap setup by the hedge funds that are short.

There is also a lot of institutional money on the long side and they also have interest in continuing the political narrative because they need somebody to hold the bags.

Remember that exuberance of the irrational variety of the 2000s craze, the departure from fundamentals and the mania of the public jumping in while the smart money were happily selling to the eager investing amateur.

We have no way of knowing if people posting gains on wsb are doing it on paper accounts or not.
> There is no use of bitcoin for which this seems well-suited.

All the things you listed are not identical to the new, very different asset class that is Bitcoin, so how can you deduce facts about Bitcoin from them?

E.g. they can't be transferred as easily as scanning a QR code with your smartphone, you can't store them in your brain, they can be de-valuated by governments, and so on.
This is exactly right. Posts just like OPs can be found all over the internet, yet it doesn't change the simple facts. Rarely, if ever, do these people come back months later to report that indeed they kept trading and lost all of their gains (if not more). What you have in OP is a snapshot in their time; hardly the complete story. Time will tell, as they say.
Gig Workers Have Nowhere to Pee (2020)
Yes, for example ushering in a new totalitarian age is much more likely than a (in children) very mild virus magically becoming super deadly.

I really think you may not have ever read the literature on COVID-19 in children. We should be shouting at the rooftops that kids are safe (and btw transmit less than kids), instead here in California we’ve closed school for a year which will - in children - far surpass the harms of COVID-19 by orders of magnitude.
"domestication" makes me think of "oversocialization" used in the unabomber manifesto[1].

> 24. Psychologists use the term “socialization” to designate the process by which children are trained to think and act as society demands. A person is said to be well socialized if he believes in and obeys the moral code of his society and fits in well as a functioning part of that society.

> ...

> 26. Oversocialization can lead to low self-esteem, a sense of powerlessness, defeatism, guilt, etc. One of the most important means by which our society socializes children is by making them feel ashamed of behavior or speech that is contrary to society’s expectations. If this is overdone, or if a particular child is especially susceptible to such feelings, he ends by feeling ashamed of HIMSELF. [...] And socialization is not just a matter of morality; we are socialized to conform to many norms of behavior that do not fall under the heading of morality. Thus the oversocialized person is kept on a psychological leash and spends his life running on rails that society has laid down for him. In many oversocialized people this results in a sense of constraint and powerlessness that can be a severe hardship. We suggest that oversocialization is among the more serious cruelties that human beings inflict on one another.

I removed some bits for brevity and because they're overtly political. I particularly like "Thus the oversocialized person is kept on a psychological leash and spends his life running on rails that society has laid down for him".

[1]: https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/longterm/unab...
> Considering this is a hedge fund, I just assume they're lying because, you know, it's a fucking hedge fund.

If this is your prior for approaching evidence, you're always going to catch big finance lying. But not because you're actually calibrated on evidence. And you won't be able to distinguish between actual fraud and baseless conspiracy.
Does Corona virus squish or shatter