skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
GME is short around 140% of it's float. Retail investors are buyers usually. So whether the shorts are hedgies or banks, they're not retail as a group.

Everyone knows that GME will eventually crash, but the question is when. If retail is smart and coordinated about it, they can definitely cash in massively when shorts cover. They would need to keep buying which looks increasingly made difficult and monitor % short of float.

Will they succeed, idk.
Ubuntu Mate, says 192 dpi currently.
Flox – Nix for Simplicity and Scale
It’s based on preexisting rules involving the volatility of the stock and whether it’s the most traded stock that day.
You could inject a custom authorizer and use something like OPA for fine grained access control. See https://github.com/Bisnode/opa-kafka-plugin for an example.
Ethereum's PoS is a completely new chain that's currently running in parallel. After watching it run in production for about a year they'll merge in the old chain.
When I was looking to fill my bookshelf with technical books last month, I stumbled upon https://hackernewsbooks.com, it helped me find a lot of good programming literature.

The websites and Twitter feeds seem similar (and both seem great), was there any specific reason why you created an alternative?
The weird thing is that Citadel Securities and Citadel are different entities. Citadel Fund went to the rescue of Melvin Capital and Citadel Securities stopped the buying trades. Suspicious eh?
Here we go again: building factories does not come off the income line. They are selling cars at a loss. Whether they manage to change that with increased scale is yet to be seen, but they are selling more cars and making less money.
Repl.it works great from Safari on iPad!
I don't understand how this can be useful without taking into account your teammates and enemies. For example, as Caitlyn I wouldn't want to take Legend Bloodline if my support was a Soraka, but otherwise it's better than Legend Alacrity in most cases.

It suggests Triumph over Overheal for Aphelios even though that rune is much more synergistic due to his pistol.

I appreciate that the tool exists, but there are problems that are more easily solved by small critical thinking than machines.
I wonder how different Windows 98 is from Windows 2000...
That's a pretty cool find :D
Personally I feel like there are a lot of important and opposing conversations about the interaction between authentic creativity and money.

One of the biggest reasons I’m a proponent of Universal Basic Income is that I want creative people to be able to create without having to fall prey to things like cutting out their medium in order to make sure they can eat and have a place to live.

However: we are currently within a capitalist society, and because of that we have to think of how we can financially enable the art and culture that we want to see more of.

This is a deeply interwoven and complex topic, but at the end of the day I just want to see interesting stuff and know that the people creating it are better because of it.
Utter dribble.

Kafka is an industry standard, it's benefits go well beyond its own qualities and extend into the ecosystem around it.

Don't attempt to replace industry standard components with any home rolled systems unless you were already capable of building said system yourself and you understand why you are a special snowflake and why you need something special.
Why do you think it’s more cost effective to build a service on linode than just use AWS?
Who said anything about ownership besides you?

You think they can't profit off their access to RH's order flow during a high volatility event like this? This is exactly what they pay for, to make maddening amounts of money off dumb money pouring in.
I really feel that FF VIwould be quite a different game without him tho
While I would like to be dazzled buy new features to me the strikes a real privacy concern without proper permissions.
And the voters will easily vote for more of such bureaucracy, wrapped in words about controlling spending, avoiding corruption, preventing money going to few private contractors, ensuring cheapest bid wins, etc. etc.

This is combined with how various voter-friendly "cheap government" initiatives go on for all kinds of internal purchases, not just big dollar projects like this.

Printers that needs servicing all the time because "cheapest bid" means you have low-quality shady consumables used.

Cars that end up constantly in service because the provider is cheap and thus couldn't do the right job servicing a Land Rover Discovery 2, taking away critical machine for reaching accident sites for aviation accident investigation.

Purchase of new cars for the same org and purpose - the freshly elected government leaked "appropriate" story to one of the newer tabloids to make it look like excess that they are curbing.

I still tell the story of SCAAI investigator buying a plane ticket for international flight because office responsible for finances in appropriate ministry refused to arrange diplomatic courier. So an investigator booked an international flight, left the plane, gave the CD full of confidential data to his local counterpart, turned 180 and went back to the same plane back.
You could add Framework7[1], a framework that imitates the style of iOS 7+. It’s not as much nostalgia, but can be fun.

https://framework7.io/
We do know who owns the stock. That's how dividends are distributed.

The desire to have instantaneous trades is why the transfer of funds follows the agreement to trade. The system actually works pretty well; first you trade, then you settle the trade. It just works on a T+2 basis.

> people like to ridicule Bitcoin for taking an hour to settle

What is the dollar value of bitcoin transactions per day, versus the dollar value of stock trades per day? Nasdaq alone trades something like $300B/day.
Nobody mentioned anything about them having morale failures. The point was that if they are making money by writing malware, then lack of education or training isn't why they're doing it, because they're clearly qualified to do at least entry level computer work. Whether or not that work is available, or pays enough, is another story.
This is dead wrong.

Melvin got a margin call from their prime broker, which is why they needed to get bailed out abruptly by Griffin and Cohen. The mid-month injection shows how dire it was and how margin calls work. Hedge funds like Melvin typically use monthly accounting, so typically you can only add/withdraw capital for the first of the month. But margin calls are fire drills, all the sudden you get a phone call saying, "We need another $3 billion in equity or we liquidate your account" and you either sell stocks like mad (though even in this case I don't think it was an option) or pray you have a white knight sugar daddy like Griffin/Cohen to write a check literally overnight. Melvin had no choice but to cover, they couldn't start doubling down it doesn't work that way, they'd be done, and actually some of these stocks like GME were so volatile that it might even eat into the prime (but really the clearing broker).
To save some time for others.

CDC -> Change Data Capture
Well, what's the evidence of that then? I think the reddit behaviour explains what happened much better, and then everyone jumped on the train because of the groundwork they set.
> Melvin Capital has a very real chance of going insolvent

I just don’t know how many more times I’m going to have to say that Melvin is going to lose everything.

Melvin and WSB are not the only two players in the market.

> Also you're completely missing the point. Do you not even understand most of these people aren't trying to make money? If you don't understand that, then you don't even have a basis to start the conversation.

That’s the meme. We’ll see how the people with tens of thousands YOLO’d feel when things turn south.

And if that’s the point, that makes this whole thing all the more depressing. They’re sticking it to the hedge funds by… blowing a bunch of money taking out one while dozens of others profit off of them?

Good luck with that.
They're all Safari wrappers on iOS because Apple deems it so. Android has no such requirements and thus when you install Firefox you're actually running Firefox.
Emacs is a bit special; a significant number of practitioners are hobbyists in ELisp and not professional programmers (which is a great thing!). I don't judge the quality of C# code by looking at amateur Unity scripts for example.

Depending on your flavour of Lisp, there are a /ton/ of naming conventions. Here's a good reference for Scheme/Racket [1], under the section "Names".

[1] https://docs.racket-lang.org/style/Textual_Matters.html
>>> Gold Window

The gold window was closed because gold was garbage money. A money supply you can’t adjust cannot respond to shocks and it can’t respond to changes in the economy or society. The crash in 2008 and again now would have been much much much worse without an ability to control supply. Inflation is defined in terms of supply and velocity. Velocity plummeted so supply was raised to offset and lo and behold the fed nailed its 2% inflation target in 2020 in spite of epic global chaos. Gold would have ruined us.

>>> wages have kept pace with inflation.

Wages are up 10% since 1963 on an inflation adjusted basis (https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2...). Google is your friend.

Yes wealth inequality is a problem, that’s a fiscal and social issue not a monetary policy issue. Tax the rich.

>>>> slush fund

Nobody’s stealing anything. The inflation target is public and goaled on. Inflation has a purpose. You don’t like that purpose maybe because you don’t understand it maybe because you do, but it’s not theft. There is every chance we’d all be worse off under a 0% inflation environment because it would drastically reduce the liquidity that underlies the entire global economy.

Think about it: if poor people have no money and real salary has kept pace with inflation what wealth is inflation reducing? And if we use a 0-inflation or negative inflation currency, what’s to say wages wouldn’t stay flat or go down.

Again if you want to help the poor and narrow the gap, tax the rich, this inflation thing is just the game, and railing against it is tilting at the wrong windmills.
We do things according to what our goals is. Tinkering around technically just for the sake of it provides no value on its own.

In this case, someone losing their voting ability because of the system on a regular basis is not acceptable. That's the obvious why not. We want to make a system to count the people's votes. If it bars a voter from casting their vote, it's a failure.
My theory is that Melvin sold their short positions to other hedge funds that have enough liquidity to weather the memestorm. Melvin itself is likely just trying to keep their other assets, so they can't afford the shorts. Now that the stock is obviously overvalued, the borrowing fee for GME is insanely high. Buying the shorts from Melvin would be an arbitrage opportunity.
There's some more info here: https://www.forbes.com/2006/08/25/naked-shorts-global-links-...

Global Links was trading around 10c a share with ~350 million shares, for a market cap of around $35 million. They implemented a 350:1 reverse share split, which in theory should have resulted in them having a stock price of $35, 1.1 million shares, and a market cap of around $35 million.

For some reason, it took longer for this to shake out than expected; in the immediate aftermath it was reported that enormous quantities of Global Links stock was still trading, and the share price had actually declined to a 8 cents.

Presumably, some systems were reporting "old" numbers (pre reverse split) and some "new" numbers (post reverse split), and I'm sure an enormous amount of confusion resulted. And it was at this point Simpson reckons he bought 1.2 million shares for a bit over $5,000.

That's less than 1/3 of a cent per share, which seems wildly off (the share price was 10 cents pre reverse split, and would have been expected to be $35 afterwards), but given that it seems a lot of computer systems were not handling this correctly, who knows what he was told by his broker?

So...obviously Simpson did not purchase 110% of a company, and he definitely didn't do so for 0.01% of its market cap. I rather assume his broker had told him that he had done so, but that seems like fodder for a lawsuit between him and his broker over their buggy systems, but it doesn't tell us much else. It's possible he might have ended up owning 3.6k shares (about 1/3 of a percent of the company), but even that seems doubtful if it actually only cost him $5k.

Anyhow:

> I think the more interesting part of the story (if I'm reading it right) is he paid $5000 to completely own a company with millions in assets.

I think the better reading of that is some guy found a bug in a broker's system that caused it to tell him he'd done that, but it would have been obvious to all concerned that whether he'd ended up with 0 shares, ~140 shares, or ~3.5k shares, he definitely didn't have 1.2m shares, since they never even existed.
In some languages you put the percentage sign at the front - like, in Turkish for instance[0].

I mean, it's not that weird. It's how currency symbols move to either front or behind of a number. Why is it $300 but 300zł?

[0] https://forum.wordreference.com/threads/percent-sign-positio...
I am not a proponent of scaling out horizontally as the best solution to all things, but being able to do so comes as a result of design that helps to minimize coupling of services and single points of failure, in general, which are other benefits.

But I also tend to think "you can always get a bigger box" can take you pretty far, and much further than most people that only think in terms of AWS realize.
> Author seems to have over 25 years of experience.

That doesn't mean much. The author has been a researcher, and then moved into management, now working on a relatively simple e-commerce project with one of the most hilarious mission statements I've ever read.

It's the kind of guy that makes me _shudder_ when he shows up in a workplace - because I already know I'm going to have to clean up after them. His dismissal of the documentation value of type systems really tells you how much experience he _actually_ has - my comeback to static typing, as is for nearly every programmer I know, specifically because of how reliable things like "look up the source/documentation/whatever" can be in statically typed code. Not everyone cares, and that's fine, but such a dismissal tells me he's very sheltered, and vastly overestimates the real complexity of his own projext.

Also apparently he worked on AspectJ, which to me tells me everything I need to know, and also probably explains why he hates the JVM even more than I do.
So what were his alternatives? That society be made up of loosely-connected hermits such as himself?

If you're going to have anything resembling a community, you're going to need strongly enforced norms (aka "oversocialization") that minimize internal strife and division. This is true for hunter-gatherer bands and continent-spanning civilizations.
> Whether the shorts were naked or not before this started, the shorts are unquestionably bankrupt with GME at or above $300.

That is not correct.

You have no idea whether or not the shorts currently open, as of today, were opened when GME was worth $12, $50, or $400.

It's entirely possible that many of the $12 shorts closed when the stock first rallied.

> That’s when you have massive failure to deliver and the whole corrupt organism goes into CYA mode and tries to shut down buying and bring the stock price back in-line with their models.

The reason trading on shitty retail brokerages like RobinHood was shut down was because the clearinghouse collateral requirements went through the roof, and shitty retail brokerages like RobinHood weren't able to instantly come up with a couple of billion dollars to wire to the clearinghouses. (They did, eventually, which is why buys resumed on Friday.)

You get what you pay for with brokerages. They are an abstraction layer over a highly technical, 19th-century layer of physical settlement of stocks. When the market isn't going crazy, this abstraction works, with minimum collateral requirements. When the market is going crazy, this abstraction stops working, and their counterparties start demanding billions of dollars in collateral.
Wouldn’t apps relying on CDC events be strongly coupled as well? They’re just not synchronously coupled.
Llama Rust SDK preview 0.1.3
There is a very nice, very accessible series of topology talks he did here : https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLTBqohhFNBE_09L0i-lf3fYXF...

Very early on he covers Möbius Strips and Klein Bottles (what most amateur mathematicians want to hear when they go to a topology video) and later on he touches on how Brouwer’s Fixed Point theorem relates to Nash Equilibriums

I’ve tried to learn topology several times and was bogged down in definitions of open and closed (and of course “clopen” sets) every time. His lectures were very refreshing.

(Long time lurker, I lost my login and created a new one just to share this)
In case you haven't already read it, do read the classic LinkedIn "Log" article: https://engineering.linkedin.com/distributed-systems/log-wha...

I just learned Kafka this year to augment an existing system at work. One thing I have found is, there's a good amount of smarts in the Kafka clients. Look carefully at the Kafka clients available for the runtimes you work with, and evaluate them for robustness, features, and development activity (sadly, for example, kafka-node seems to have lost all momentum).
It's hilarious how a thread about US immigration studies turned into discussion on German corporate ladder. And, various european attitudes about ethnicities.

Germany is not US. Europe is not US. How they deal with societal situations will be different from how US deals with societal situations.

Are there lots of German/Europe HN users? I am US centric so I tend to think HN is US thing, specifically tech cities, mainly, San Francisco.
That's the thing. If we were to start from scratch building a stock market or banking system today, we might take different approaches.

But there's a market that exists at substantial scale that was originally built around T+14 settlement (and then T+7, T+5, T+3, all the way down to T+2 which is really still brand new). And while there's substantial risks and costs that come from delayed settlement, there's also substantial benefits... and an entire global financial system that relies upon the properties we get from these settlement delays. Another equilibrium being perhaps slightly better overall doesn't necessarily justify reinventing the wheel.

I suspect we'll get to T+1 settlement for stocks and many banking transactions in a few more years (we're already there for options)... and then it may be time to discuss the benefits of various types of "instant" settlement for some subset of financial activity.
Warren Buffet and Charlie Munger on shorting:

https://youtu.be/GVtaKKn43M8

“It’s ruined a lot of people “

“It’s the sort of thing you can go broke doing”
> The obvious discontinuity is "never have to work".

First, wanting to achieve "financial independence" does not imply a discontinuous utility function.

Suppose it takes $X to reach financial independence. Let's say that when I achieve $X, I have utility Y. It is possible that as I approach $X from the left, my utility continuously approaches Y.

In fact, I argue that's what happens for most people who have a FIRE goal — they get happier and happier until they reach their goal. (It's true that once they reach their goal and experience retired life, they decide that retirement's not all that it's cracked up to be, but I argue that's because their utility has dropped because of another variable has changed: they have stopped working.)

In other words, "wanting to not have to work again" and "having a continuous utility function" do not contradict each other. And the people who are dedicated to saving enough money to not have to work (FIRE) almost always have utility functions that are continuous wrt. money!

> when they talk about this stuff.

Again, people might say that they have a discontinuous utility function, but talk is cheap. Real economists (TM) measure utilities through examining a consumer's revealed preferences because what people say doesn't always reflect what people do.
I've also seen bubbles and pearls here in AU, but never boba. e.g. https://sharetea.com.au/bubble-tea-menu/
There's a different soft core called the nextz80 that's supposed to do 4x more per clock cycle than a normal z80.

"Works at up to 40MHZ on Spartan XC3S700AN speed grade -4) - performances similar or better than a real Z80 running at 160Mhz."

Guessing that might not be great for games though :)

https://opencores.org/projects/nextz80
Lmao yeah like all the terrorists that stormed the capitol.

Given this logic, we should charge all ppl with guns and other stock piles who wave confederate flags as potential terrorists who want to overthrow the government too?

At least her cause seemed legit (racism). Also she is reformed now? Still a terrorist though I guess, just like all those neo-nazis who are "reformed".

Edit: I realize I'm being biased here, but trying to point out your own (strawman) bias lol.
I agree; its important to keep in mind that GME's total market cap, even after all of this, is only ~$22B. A 140% short position is bad (even if that's the real number, which I doubt), but in the scope of all things, not world-ending. Some hedge funds will die from this, and we'll probably have a few weeks of overall market downturn similar to last year, but we're not talking about "the entire US real estate market" here.

The US government could buy the entirety of GameStop at 3x its current price and it would barely quality for a line on the annual budget report.
nahh this strays too far from the pure css ethos. but thx :)
That's a bit of survivor bias: Most startups don't go from small to large, or even really medium. Most startups are strapped for resources. Paying an extra engineer, or taking valuable time away from an existing one to implement an extremely scalable infrastructure that might not be used. They should focus on shipping a good product that people want, and getting people to buy it. I can't think of startups that failed because their stack needed to be upgraded for scalability. It's generally not why startups fail. I can find a whole lot who burned through their cash before they had a chance to need something orders of magnitude larger in scale than currently necessary. If it's a minimal cost in time & money? Sure, go for high scalability. But it it's going to reduce your runway significantly then worry about the bigger problem of becoming successful enough to need it in the first place.

If a startup is really concerned about avoiding the problems you're encountering at your company they should just take an extra week when planning their infrastructure to map out details of how they would transition to a more scalable infrastructure. Then save that file somewhere and dust it off if they ever need it. And if they need it, they'll have ample investment money coming their way to pay for the transition.
It's free and unleashed in the sense that the cost is paid elsewhere