skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
There's an absolute load of "see? now it's happening to you!" in this thread, and yet, even from a leftist point of view, the cases lamented in the article seem reasonable to me (barring cases where the article doesn't give any specifics).
Tech, developer foundations to California: Go big on housing
Hardcore software: Inside the rise and fall of the PC revolution
Great little site! Couple notes for ya:

- There's a typo, "frist" should be "first" :)

- Would be great if I could click a button to get prompted to enable the notifications. I didn't get a prompt when I loaded the page, and didn't want to look up instructions for manually enabling the notifications.

Nice work!
Tesla CEO Elon Musk Just Sent Bitcoin Sharply Higher, Boosting Its Price 20%
Ah, ok.

I have a couple of ideas (and/or can both be applied here to some degree):

- improve vpn to the point that people can and will use it to browse their photos.

- make hardened login solutions, run services behind that

- local hosters, stronger data protection rules

- fringe benefits at work or as part of union membership? (I admit I don't like the lock in aspect of this)

- make software local only by default

etc
Pretty well captured by that old comedy sketch "The expert" [1]

I dare say that most people here on HN have been hit by upper management telling them to do something stupid or impossible. I'd even wager that most have had them get defensive when you try to explain why doing X isn't a good idea.

That's effectively what I see when someone criticizes "experts" broadly and generally. I've long accepted that there are many individuals that know a lot more about subjects I know little about. While I have a pretty good read on things related to computers, I'm more than willing to admit that I'm not an expert in science, medicine, climatology.

So who should I trust? Should I trust the youtuber that's "Found" the secret that the "so called experts" are trying to hide from the public? Or should I look to the actual experts actually working in the field and take their word for it? Or do I take the harder route and try and build understanding on the subject on my own?

I certainly have tried to expand my personal understanding in general. However, what I've found is that by and large the experts actually know what they are talking about. You should generally trust them. The place where I've found a LOT of misinformation is the "skeptics" that hurl doubt without evidence while denigrating "experts". That is the place where I've found outright lies.

Evidence of such BS artists include Flat earthers, Anti-vaxxers, and climate change deniers. Those are all flat out wrong positions. There's mountains of evidence and experts against each of those positions and mostly lies or misrepresentation in favor.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg
Tesla isn't an investing firm. They don't even really have much in the way of acquisitions yet. Tesla would have to do something pretty blatant to really piss off the SEC. Elon's $420 tweet was greeted with a slap on the wrist precisely because "you're new here, aren't you?".

The better analogy would be if SpaceX pissed off the FAA.
Platform risk has always been a factor in finance. That's a large part of why retail investing is regulated so heavily: retail investors expect an abstraction layer where your counterparties will always be there and your trades will always be settled, even though the underlying market often doesn't work that way.
I am not an expert in Rust's mechanics and only looked at it superficially, but I got the impression that shared references can't be guaranteed (to not exist in mutable ways) all the way through an object graph. I am not surprised if I am wrong about that. It wasn't the main deciding factor for me...

My primary factor was "Actor Model" and I was struggling with Erlang's lack of static types, so that put Pony in the focus. An Actor Model framework on top (I recalled there was one for Rust) had given me "questionable" results with Akka (due to compromises/constraints in the JVM and Java/Scala).

HTH
Why weren't they fired?

If you want to specialize in delivery of certain publications or packages and refuse to process others, go to private sector.
> Medicine also suffers from a fear (justified) of litigation.

very US-centric. Medical litigation in many others parts of the world doesn't work in the same way, and isn't a driving force in the way medicine is practiced.
"Chest X-rays of asymptomatic patients – those infected but without symptoms – exhibited a severe chest X-ray 70%-80% of the time, but those with COVID-19 symptoms had one every time, she also added."

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2021/01/26/fac...

There are things that can make living quite uncomfortable. So while yes not everyone will be hospitalized and die, there is still a lot of reasons to get any decently effective vaccine.

Edit:

"Bankhead-Kendall, who has treated thousands of patients since the pandemic began last March, says patients who had COVID-19 symptoms show a severe chest X-ray every time, and those who were asymptomatic show a severe chest X-ray 80 percent of the time."
And you just described a form of market manipulation. Except that we can't know Melvin's true motives because for some weird reason, hedge funds don't have to make their methodologies public.

So why are you getting mad that retail investors are engaging in the same practices that hedge funds can do with impunity?
Every notable online review venue works to resist canvassed reviews, which break the whole concept of online reviews.
Would you please provide citations for this?

These are pretty extraordinary claims.
A large part of Robinhood's entire product is papering over the difference between a cash account and a margin account, and hiding the intracacies and timing of the underlying market.

> Your cash is transferred and deposited.

When you open a new account, and start a transfer from your bank, that is not instantaneous. "Cash" doesn't magically appear in Robinhoods' account. Until that deposit clears, you are effectively operating on margin.

If you recently sold something on Robinhood, and want to buy something else, "cash" isn't in your account yet, because that original sale hasn't settled. Robinhood is papering over that as well. This one in particular I'm not saying they shouldn't paper over, since I believe it's less of a risk.

But each of these "Robinhood covering your unsettled positions" adds a little bit of risk. This risk adds up.

The suggestion of Robinhood only letting people trade with cash that is fully settled into their accounts would completely swap the underlying paradigm of Robinhood's product.

Even so, new trades you want to make would have to settle. And as discussed elsewhere, Robinhood has to funds and deposits to cover potential risk associated with those trades until they settle.

There is a lot under the hood that is abstracted away by Robinhood, and now those intricacies are leaking out (and completely mis-understood, because one of the premises of Robinhood's product is that you shouldn't have to understand, or even know about, them)
The math didn't add when they said that they were already covered. They were lying about the position they hold.
Good advice but its a hard sell in overly saturated markets and most people are just shopping for the lowest price.
The narrative that retail investors have stuck it to hedge funds is laughable.

Who do they think is selling counter party is?

All they’ve managed to do transfer wealth from one hedge fund to another. And eventually when this pops they have transferred wealth from themselves to other winning hedge funds.
You explain the rules to them as clearly as possible when they join, and put in alarm bells to sound when your margin account is getting low. Robinhood could have had a ticker on their homepage showing how close they were to being forced to stop trading, for example.
Reminds me of an article I keep in my bookmarks from a long time ago, which is probably still true today: 39% of Americans think they are in the top 1% or that they will one day be [1]. They don't want to be mean to the rich because they think they are rich or will soon be among them.

1: https://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/12/opinion/the-triumph-of-ho...
It's a big club and you aren't in it. These Banks literally have a license to print money but they need to be protected from regular joes with smart phones. New laws protecting hedge funds are incoming.
Well, they've published a blog post. And got CEO on the news. But what they offered was not an explanation.

The explanation they offered in their blog post:

"As a brokerage firm, we have many financial requirements, including SEC net capital obligations and clearinghouse deposits. Some of these requirements fluctuate based on volatility in the markets and can be substantial in the current environment. These requirements exist to protect investors and the markets and we take our responsibilities to comply with them seriously, including through the measures we have taken today."

That's not an explanation, that's just hot air.

What financial requirements? What capital obligations and clearinghouse deposits? Which requirements fluctuate based on volatility? How do these requirements protect the investors and the markets? And ultimately, how exactly any of this leads to them blocking buy orders on $GME?
Brokerage firms are backed by banks, and if a brokerage firm was somehow small enough that they couldn't provide the liquidity to cover the trades, then the banks backing them are on the hook.
No, we don’t.

We need to let people build their communities without tethering agency to outsiders who control the flow of imaginary capital.

Pretending a value in a database is real ownership of something is insane and continues to lead humanity towards fascism to protect the oligopoly at the top of the meme pyramid.

You’re selling an appeal to authority that is a complete mirage, only existing in your head because of years of reinforcement.
Three-dimensional model of electricity consumption in Manchester (1954)
That's a tendency for all headlines/articles, not just those on HN
But I don't have to play most of the games produced this way. So I don't experience the crap. If you make six wildly different board games, five of which are utter trash, and one is genius, I never have to play the five trash games at all.

This is the same in a lot of creative fields. Novels, pop music, video games, movies. A handful of professional reviewers might see dozens at a time, but I see a couple based on their recommendations, and maybe I like half of what I see even though Sturgeon's revelation is correct.
It could be argued that r/wallstreetbets is a public forum. Anyone can join. Think of it like a virtual conference room.

If I walk into this room and yell “Everybody buy GME to screw the hedge funds” am I engaging in market manipulation? There is no formal or informal agreement to do so if someone says “ok great idea” and go buys GME.

Besides how are they going to enforce the laws? Match IPs to ISPs and extradite all the thousands if not millions of people across the world who bough stock? If a fine is issued do they just divide it up by the number of people who commented in wallstreetbets and held stock? Or is every person fined individually?

How is this worse than the sell walls that hedge funds use to deflate a share price?

The truth of the matter is the SEC dropped the ball. They were probably too busy having a wank while on pornhub [0].

In December as soon as the share price started to rise GME was placed on the NYSE threshold securities list for large numbers of “failure to deliver”. Keep in mind it had entered this same list earlier in the year. Followers of wallstreetbets were suspicious and believed that illegal naked short selling was occurring so they informed the SEC [1].

Then a few weeks later the stock rose 10% then 50% the next day leaving the call options ITM on a Friday afternoon. What did the SEC do? They sat on their hands over the weekend instead of suspending trading of the stock and performing an investigation.

[0] https://abcnews.go.com/amp/GMA/sec-pornography-employees-spe...
[1] https://www.reddit.com/r/wallstreetbets/comments/kr98ym/gme_...
Adenovirus vaccines are also a newish tech (not that anything wrong with that, that's why we have safety testing). Its not as bleeding edge as mRNA but its definitely not a traditional vaccine
I think it has no value.

If you want crypto money -> https://nano.org

If you want to build decentralized apps -> https://ethereum.org/en/ or https://tezos.com
Exploitable Overflow in Libgcrypt 1.9.0
Clearing houses cover any shortage of money due to one party not paying up. So if someone sells an option on an exchange, then doesn't pony up, the clearing house must. And if too many people don't pony up, the clearing house is in trouble.

Except it is far more complicated. Does Robin Hood allow the selling options? That would seem ridiculously stupid if it does, but let's say yes. The clearing house has nothing to do with the seller, or in fact probably with Robin Hood. It will be dealing with Robin Hood's dealer, probably a big bank (think JP Morgan or the like), and there's a cascade of who-owes-who.

Robin Hood clients ought to pay to Robin Hood if they owe money on short options, but if they fail, then Robin Hood must cover that to the broker. The broker wants to make sure it doesn't lose any money on trading with Robin Hood, because if it does, it still needs to make good to the exchange. And only if the broker fails, then the clearing house gets involved.

If you can only buy options on Robin Hood (or, in any case, cannot be short), then there isn't much of an issue there. The issue would arise if the broker cannot pay the option payouts, but that's very unlikely. Banks deal with option trading all the time, and spend lots of money on hedging their exposure to the underlying stock. This is essentially a solved problem, and the scale of what's going on is way too small to stress that.
I just spent 5 min going through the website reading about pony and its goals and use cases.

I still have no idea what actual Pony code looks like and I'm not sure where to click to find it.

I even clicked the link "learning pony." Of all the places to see at least a hello world, I'd like one there please.

When I am checking out a language for the first time, I like to at least see a sample of what I'll be committing to writing for the next few months.

go lang as a sample you can run on the home page! rust used to but you can still press playground to get it.
Maybe I'm just being pessimistic, but seeing this in the light of their upcoming IPO and yesterday's Robinhood debacle makes me feel like this is an attempt to be seen as "legitimate" in they eyes of Wall Street.
Elon Musk's tweets are moving markets – and some investors are worried
> Fundamentals are about long-term investing and growing money over time [...] Day trading is about speculation

What you call 'day trading' has turned into week trading, has turned into multiple-month trading, and I would argue even beyond a year now in a lot of cases. Plenty of stocks have been pumped far beyond what their 'fundamentals' would justify. In some cases, that has changed the trajectory of companies and even entire sectors.

> in the long term, GME's value hasn't changed

This is entirely debatable. The investors just changed it, and new people are on the board who could potentially turn it into an eSports empire, or the next Valve, or who knows what else. Not at all likely, I know, but money changes things and there is some amount of 'true believer' investment happening, like we saw with Tesla.

Honestly, I don't like all this volatility one bit. I am increasingly concerned about not ending up homeless when I'm elderly. But the fact is, the market appears to be changing, and so-called 'retail investors' may be gaining new prominence in the greater order of things. Valuations based on hopes for what could happen 30 years out instead of how much paper profits got jacked up over a 3-month period. It's scary and I don't like it. But who knows, in the long run it could be a good thing? I don't think you, or I, or anyone else can say from here.
Chosen by the (female) initiators and developers of the project, aiming for an open and playful approach to the topic (I guess).
That's an absolutely awful argument. Elon Musk rich so don't have to bother with the SEC?
There are a couple of Rust actor frameworks, the most popular being actix [0] and bastion [1]

0: https://github.com/actix/actix
2: https://bastion.rs/
Why would you put 200 shares at $50 and 100 shares at $100 if you only had a $10,000 budget? That's misrepresenting your actual demand curve.

Are you saying that an auction of this kind is a bit complicated, and it's possible to make a mistake? I suppose that might be true, but that is a very different assertion from your original position:

"since people had to enter a single point on their demand curve as a price and quantity of shares (instead of their entire demand curve)"
People are more bothered about the emotional virtue of a statement than they are about it’s truthfulness when it comes to the pandemic.
That's a great example. They have $1T in debts (the deposits), and $1T in assets (the cash + home loans owed them). To simplify our example, let's assume that some of those home loans are in trouble so the "continuing business" part of the company is worth $0, that the expected profit from those loans exactly balances the expected interest expenses on their deposits. So their market cap is $0.

Market cap is $0, EV is $800B. So is the company worth $0 or $800B? *Both answers are right*. You have to specify worth to who before getting an answer. To the economy it has almost a trillion dollar impact, to an investor it's worthless.
The top-selling branded drugs price increased. Generic drug prices (the relevant comparison to Cuban's Cost Plus) showed no significant changes.
Yeah, he sure sounds like a low achiever.
Yeah, I'm not at all defending blocking buys, just saying that blocking both buys AND sells was completely out of the question.
I am pretty sure they're a broker who hedges their positions with a counterparty. Otherwise, they would be taking on the risk themselves?

But I think my math was backwards on the closing transaction. If the spreads widen they would technically end up net positive.
I'm sufficiently versed on the days of snake oil. I'm also familiar with the modern follies of the FDA, including artificial spinal disk treatments, "standard of care" balks, etc.
>KYC and government regulations are a pain, but the core decentralized, limited supply, secure nature of Bitcoin will remain fully intact.

>decentralized
How much of BTC is owned by large miners?

>Limited supply
If we can't mine more, those with the larger supply have control.

>secure

For now.

Blockchain as the idea will propagate and is great, but bitcoin has failed.

>Please do not confuse Bitcoin with “the overall crypto market”

But it's value is quite tied to the crypto arket, isn't it?
Trust is not covered by terms.
You are so biased because you think GME is overvalued at $300.

Your bias even makes you defend Robinhood’s action to disable cash accounts buying certain stocks as DULY.

Wow
French 'buy now pay later' player Scalapay raises $48M
I was so goo at debugging the hardware I underestimated just how difficult will it be to switch to software even when you really good at that language. But set up is important esp for web technologies as they are buggy by default. Interestingly I never had issue with C
> exhibited a severe chest X-ray 70%-80% of the time

With a sample size of what? That's a nonsense statement that can't be scrutinised.

Edit, found this: The finding is promising but will require further research given the small size of the study with only 82 patients, mostly male and average age over 50

82 people over the age of 50. It also doesn't mention how healthy these people were.

This is typical of pretty much all media coverage: very little facts but also very little to throw back at them...
Essentially none of what is written in your "rants" is factually accurate, unless by calling it out you meant to make clear that these were emotional ramblings unrelated to reality.

Neutral analysts on CNBC providing commentary is pretty different than someone with a financial stake trying to pump up a stock they own to maximize their profit.

There is no evidence that any of the major funds involved in shorting have done anything illegal.

There's nothing illegal about a wash sale, wash sales are just a minor technicality around how cost basis is calculated for tax purposes.

People figured out they could exploit a fund that was overexposed in a trade and did so. We don't need all the conspiracies and class warfare. Greedy retail traders took some money from some greedy hedge funds, that's the whole story, it doesn't need to be more than that.
How is this new? Platform risk has always existed. One of the biggest in the past 10 years being Mt Gox.
Your trades don't take days, depositing cash into your account does. I imagine that applies to them as well, they just all already have 2 billion in there. They will also have margin accounts that gives them instant funding, like you do. Addmitedly I doubt they get their margin orders canceled very much when they buy risky things.
Not everything. A wrapped Monero wouldn't make much sense.
there is a not so low prob you have worms. even without itching
Almost every free iPhone app I install has a "enjoying our app? Rate it in the app store!" interstitial at some point in the user journey.

Is that "working to resist canvassed reviews"?

(I agree they should; I don't agree they are resisting it.)
From the guidelines: "Otherwise please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait; don't editorialize."
>This is all quite strange considering how much of a game changer and scientific motivator evidence of ETI would be.

Well not only a motivator in an inspirational sense but if we can actually get our hands on ET debris who knows what technical leaps we might achieve by attempting to reverse engineer it/parts of it.
> I met X who did Y terrible thing, he isn't actually a bad guy, I am going to ignore all the public information about X and prioritise my super special "insider" knowledge

And it's such a trope. I swear, it feels like the quality of discussion on HN has gotten measurably more low-brow in the last few days.
> I have no idea how the FDA can hold back these vaccines in good conscience…

The UK versus FDA Thalidomide experience is at least one good reason.
Bitcoin Telegram Bot
If it took me six months to become productive, I would be deeply embarrassed. There must be something wrong with the talent pool you are able to attract.

To elaborate a good engineer will be able to read a well designed system and almost immediately start mimicking what needs to be done when adding new features regardless of how much experience they have in the given language/framework.
https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboard-Accessories/HYPER-M-2-X1... vs https://highpoint-tech.com/USA_new/nvme_raid_controllers.htm . One card is about x10 expensive, but looks like performance is same. Am I missing some thing.
> Then what was the point?

I mostly agree with your analysis, and I don’t have any money invested in GME (I usually do private investments).
But at the same time, I think there is incredible value in exposing how much of a lie “the free market” is...
It's sad that 25 years of technology has made for slower websites. I know it's a crude measure but this site scores a perfect 100 for mobile on PageSpeed Insights. Years later people are putting hours into trying to achieve a score in the high 90s, dreaming of hitting 100 so many years later - there are 500+ posts on SO about this.

https://developers.google.com/speed/pagespeed/insights/?url=...
Thank you for this. I have an autoimmune disease and welcome any and all alternative therapy options (to discuss with my doctor).