skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
So that I don't agree with.

Good point, and is actually the thing I have the most problem with here with other institutions but you're right that RH did the same thing: only weathered the storm by a few mechanisms, one of which upended democratic access to the market.

RH probably had a bad choice to make: The clearing houses were demanding more collateral, RH had to figure it out. RH was still wrong, but the fundamental problems were those mechanisms that allowed lack of collateral to discriminatorily disadvantaged on class of investors in favor of others. I doubt that was the deliberate intent when these mechanisms arose, but it sure is the result, and needs to be fixed.

I'm not convinced on the theory of efficient markets & allocation of capital. WSB making decisions knowingly contrary to the underlying finances of a company sort of undermines that theory. Those theories pretty much rely on people making, mostly, fundamentally, financial decisions, even if they're wrong or poorly informed. WSB was making more a philosophical decision (along with some pile on FOMO, sure) and that method of decision making is definitely not covered by the theory of efficient markets.

Though I suppose the GME incident, with the peripheral stocks like AMC, could be viewed as the first round of an iterated prisoner's dilemma. It was a "defection" that worked this time. But, if the institutions impacted and those watching are left to respond on their own instead of through artificial protection, they might very well come up with strategies that would thwart the philosophical decision making of WSB in this situation.
> it's probably going to be leaflets & magazin ads with sound first

Advertising is truly the worst thing humans have done in history, IMO. All advertising has done is made everyone think they aren't good enough and to buy too much crap and kill our planet and even cause wars and uprisings.

Also: Don't try to confuse things you advertiser-pricks: "advertising" is whenever you cram your crap in front of my face or into my ears in places I don't want to or need to see it, like TV ads, print ads, or a speaker in the newspaper someday.

No, industry events aren't "advertising", that's "networking" and people choose to go there. No, it's not "advertising" if Amazon tries to suggest useful things I might need/want, that's a "recommendation" and people choose to see them (somewhat). No, classified ads are not "advertising", regardless of the name, that's a "market" and people choose to look there.
This is very true. Once upon a time -o3 would enable fast-math. We're very careful to ensure we use test models to verify the outputs of release binaries. Enabling fast-math as you have said optimises the equations in a way that produces different results.
Correct me if my understanding is wrong, but more than a political statement, this seems to be indeed a way to make the most money possible. Political tones are a satisfying sprinkle for many, but what everyone understands there is the more they hold, the higher the value gets. We will be able to judge by the result shortly.
Interesting! I was exposed to a "3D" dungeon crawler (Wizardry[0]) on the Apple II in September of the same year.

I do wonder if 3D Monster Maze truly qualifies as "the world's first ever 3D game on a home computer" given that the lead programmer didn't own one of the machines until April of '81 and that the commercial release occurred the following year (at least according to the article on Wikipedia - the sidebar says published 1981 so it's contradictory).

The birthday anecdote seems plausible but if Wizardry was in development for more than six months then it predates 3D Monster Maze.

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wizardry
This generally requires far out of the money call options for medium term and long term dates. For most of the week, there have been no options available for sale far out of the money. Last week there were no calls that even could exist that were out of the money. See last Friday's gamma squeeze and resulting short covering on the 25th and 26th. Anyway, at this point, the position is costing many 10's of % per week to carry, not exactly great when the bag has also been doubling in size every day.
It is a funny spin on that aphorism.
> Ten percentage points above their nearest rival?

Perhaps you've heard of the problem of "vote splitting":

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vote_splitting

> How much more of a majority do you think it could possibly be?

Well, try 51% for a start.
This.

Its like arguing: Timmy steals money all day. I also want to steal money but Timmy steals from his rich parents, but since I can't I steal from my neighbors. Big poo poo cops said that stealing is not okay, but that's bad! I want to also steal because Timmy gets to steal from his parents!

Instead of "The cops said stealing is no longer permitted, also take a look at Timmy."
None of that is really relevant. Both AZ and EU agreed to this contract. If AZ has signed a contract that they cannot fulfill, then they have commited a fraud.
This is a misconception of what Free Software means.

I don't have a source to hand, but if I recall correctly, Stallman used to sell discs containing only Free Software, and made a profit doing so. That's in keeping with Free Software principles, although the Internet has mostly put an end to the practice (with exceptions like Red Hat). Stallman was also paid good money to implement enhancements to the GCC compiler suite.

It's also possible to accept donations for a Free Software project, or to offer to host the software as a paid service, or to charge for support (quite common in the GNU/Linux world, also with LibreOffice). Lastly, you can find a salaried job writing Free Software, such as Linux kernel development.

As someone already pointed out (unfortunately from a throwaway account), Free Software isn't against profit. They're pretty upfront about this. It's true that it can be very challenging to monetize Free Software, but that's an unfortunate harsh reality, not a tenet of the philosophy.

Incidentally this topic turned up yesterday over at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25946073
All power to Facebook!

I can (and do) block Facebook and be almost not affected with what they do, but iPhones as part of a duopoly cannot be avoided. I like and use Apple hardware but hope that Facebook and Epic rip them into pieces. It's completely inacceptable that a single company holds the sole power to access such a widespread platform. There needs to be a side-loading choice and alternative app stores.
It is a mitzvah to the intelligent investor. A fool and his money are soon parted
Unlike Cramer, he provided DD and was transparent on his positions.
But you're certainly persistent in trying to get others to agree/see to your viewpoint on here.

Perhaps you want to influence opinion more than you think?
I'd bet so. If it's even possible.

34.2 million people in the US are estimated have diabetes and you're proposing housing all of them (and a bunch of other people) in isolation for a year or two while everyone else goes about their business.

That's a lot of housing to find somewhere, food to provide, etc. Now try to do it in, say, six months.

At it's peak, unemployment from COVID shutdowns in the US looks like they were around 20-30M last summer. So in terms of making sure those people still have income, the number of people isn't too dissimilar, but that number has declined and we also didn't have to find new, isolated, housing, food, and other services for that group.

It's also a lot of people suddenly pulled out of their existing jobs and out of the regular in-person retail market, which means you're still not going to avoid some of the shocks we're seeing anyway.
I don't think that.
I really hate it when medias censor words like “fuck”.
Sure. He was smart, understood investment and had 50k to spare. And at least a bit lucky. This does not apply to most people who want to be him.

Much as the narrative that this is the little guys 'crushing Wall St' sells more clicks than a lot of betting going on with plenty of Wall St winners and plenty more little guy losers, mainstream media really ought to know better. (That said, I think this particular profile is a lot more illuminating than a lot of the rubbish being written)
The EU or rather the European Investment Bank also funded BioNTech. What they did not was fund a facility.

Sanofi announced a couple of days ago that they're at the disposal of BioNTech for vaccine production.
Plus the story had somehow intertwined all these big named hedge funds, Melvin, Citadel, with real losses in the Billions (capital B), all being covered by every major news outlet and commented on by major politicians and celebrities.

Life is strange. It’s a Cinderella story if you look at it from the pure narrative perspective.

If anyone ever makes a documentary/movie about it, it should be a dark comedy - money is just depressingly funny. The things we justify and do for it.
That paper is mostly referencing brand search at large companies which is completely different than lookalike ads for small, unknown companies. I'm not really sure how the comparison is relevant.

If your point is that effective advertising strategies vary by company then I agree, but that is a tangential and meaningless point in the context of the above conversation.
> Lockdowns do not work

Hi, Victoria, Australia here. Today, our state is at 24 days of zero community transmission of covid, managed largely via a small lockdown after a small outbreak from interstate.

Before that small outbreak, we were up to 80-ish days of zero community transmission of covid, after a much much larger outbreak which was brought under control by a robust lockdown which began in March and continued into December.

Lockdowns work, if people obey them. And we’re proof of that.
I was more pointing out that even though "More often than not, the calls will expire worthless." is true, the quote refers to the fact that buyers of calls have limited defined risk while sellers of naked call options have unlimited and undefined risk. That's the steamroller.
RH also explains it. Some people don't bother paying attention to that in both cases.
When playing a computer game, of course, after you get a high score, you start over at zero, and there's a good chance you switch to a different game.
Here's a quote from your guy DFV:

"Well as a longer-term investor I have the benefit of heavily discounting daily moves. I care much more about the longer-term charts, and these have been fairly constructive for months now. Even today, after the typical quarterly sell-off, the longer-term chart still looks decent so there’s been nothing to panic over. Let’s see what the price does over the next few weeks.
Of course charts are only a minor part of the equation in my opinion. The fundamentals are much more important in a situation like this."
Thanks! That makes more sense now.
Signal also doesn’t track your activity across the web and thus does not get any big in-your-face popup. You can also go to Signal’s website to read additional information about why that’s the case.

Apple isn’t really giving themselves a special dispensation here. Giving users additional information about how Facebook messenger (and others) are doing things that most users don’t expect is a service.
I thought rust was supposed to prevent most classes of memory errors. They must have not passed the right options to their cargo.
> maybe you can structure the Pony API so that you don't do that

So from what I could gather from a quick glance through the tutorial, that would be to restrict the C code calls to a single actor, and have other actors call, I guess primarily through the async behaviors?
I'd been going off this link[1] from the previous "Ram is the new diskx thread, but I think last time I read it I'd only counted one Infinity Fabric Inter-Socket on the 1P diagram (which provides the PCIe). On review, willing to bet, yeah, the pcie lanes aren't all sharing the one IFIS. The diagram is to give an idea, not the actual configuration.

[1] https://en.wikichip.org/wiki/amd/infinity_fabric#Scalable_Da...
Right but the WSB one is inverted.
Ask HN: Is the options pricing model broken for deep GME OTM puts?
TLDR the value of puts with a strike price of less than $5/share has gone way up, despite the stock price moving in the opposite direction. Is this a case of a mispricing due to a model that doesn't take into account this level of volatility? (...and thus a great opportunity?)

I noticed that with the volatility spike of GME over the past few days, with it ripping upwards, the puts with a strike price of less than 5 dollars per share have also increased in value. My guess is that because the volatility is now so high, the model for pricing options now believes it much more likely that GME will end up with a very low (<$5) share price. For many of these put options, they are valued much higher than they were a month ago when GME traded much lower.

Here's the options chain for GME: pay attention to the puts with strike price of $1-$5. https://ca.finance.yahoo.com/quote/GME/options?date=1616112000&p=GME

And here's an example chart of a couple of the options in particular: notice their value increasing over the past few days even though the share price is now quite high:

https://ca.finance.yahoo.com/quote/GME230120P00002000?p=GME230120P00002000
https://ca.finance.yahoo.com/quote/GME210319P00005000/chart?p=GME210319P00005000

It seems like from a logical perspective, the fact that GME is now a household name and that the company can dilute their shares to raise capital means that although the shares might crash back down again, they are extremely unlikely to dip below $5 in the next year or two. The options are being priced as if GME is going bankrupt this year (...and it's definitely not).

Does anyone have a counterpoint to this? Why wouldn't anyone with capital to spare just be loading up on cash secured puts for an extremely low risk ~10-30% return?
It's a form of fuzzing. A bug free build system would not be affected by non-determinism.
He has a very interesting youtube page under then pseudonym 'Roaring Kitty'.
When everyone is convinced X is going to happen, it tends to not happen, or at least not in the way it is expected by the consensus.

People said Tesla would crash when Tesla doubled a year ago from $200 to $400, and then to $900, etc., and then it did a 5-1 split, etc. Yes it did crash 20% in August, but from a price that was so high that it was still considerably higher than it was last year when the pundits were warning of a bubble.

Few foresaw the S&P 500 would surge 70% off the lows from Covid and make new highs later that year. The pundit consensus what that that it would be a bad, deep, long bear market.

Same for the post-Covid tech boom, which few foresaw too.

GME is not crashing as everyone is expected it to, even with Robinhood restricting buys. It is up huge today. I think this has a lot more to run, IMHO. More shorts will get squeezed out next week.

Like Tesla, GME may not really end badly at all and just keep going up and up.

I own some GME and not worried. Yeah, it is not that much of my total net worth, but I have found that heeding warnings of bubbles usually just means selling too soon.

If GME does crash, there will be no systemic risk or anything like that. It will be an isolated event.
What do you mean by not helpful. From the wikipedia on LTCM,

- The contributions from the various institutions were as follows:

- $300 million: Bankers Trust, Barclays, Chase, Credit Suisse First Boston, Deutsche Bank, Goldman Sachs, Merrill Lynch, J.P.Morgan, Morgan Stanley, Salomon Smith Barney, UBS

- $125 million: Société Générale

- $100 million: Paribas and Lehman Brothers

- Bear Stearns and Crédit Agricole declined to participate.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long-Term_Capital_Management#1...
They initiate a cash transfer via ACH, which takes a few days (absurd). In the meantime they honor the amount you decided to withdraw. It's a bookie floating a new gambler.

I opened an account two days ago to buy one share of GME for fun, then they blocked my ability to, but I still can't take my money out -- despite my bank notifying me that it's been withdrawn. This is because they probably process all the ACH records in a nightly job on weekdays. It'll be Monday before the money can begin its 3 day trip back to my bank.

So much of this process is unnecessary but what are you going to do? They (the entrenched financial system) have you by the throat.
All of this presupposes the current flavor of programatic advertising is something worth protecting. IMO, the cost of the current targeting methods -factoring in the actors and practices of the attached data economy- is simply not worth it. Not even close. I applaud Apple's intentions, but I’m afraid they’ve made a tactical error that will only serve to cement bad practices at the end of all the lawsuits and government inquiries. Fingers crossed.
To kinda tl;dr 015a's comment (which you should read, it's excellent), a liquidity crisis, generally, is when you start running out of cash to settle things that require cash, for various practical and/or regulatory reasons. You might have plenty of other assets on your books, but you're short on cash or cash equivalents.

For a brokerage, the T+2 transaction settlement system requires brokers post collateral while a trade is in the process of being settled. T+2 means 2 business days.

On top of that Robinhood does all kinds of promotional stuff that's a drain on their cash position like giving away stock to new users.
Sham not scam. (Although that’s arguable as well.) The lack of attention to detail I would expect from Robinhood users.
I honestly read banking....
Be warned that parasites are generally pests, and in normal circumstances don't typically cause serious problems for a host.

However when crossing hosts signals can get crossed and they can cause serious health problems like eating your retina, brain, hearts, etc. Be very careful with parasites that aren't evolved for humans.
Even when I knew it was there it took me a while to find it, so yeah, at the very least put it under its own header, first or second one.
idk. It seems like a savings account could do the trick. You can save a healthy retirement by putting a portion of your salaries in a savings account in your local credit union.

As a bonus—while you are not using that money—other members of your credit union can use this savings in a form of a loan, to buy a home, start a business, etc.

The idea of my retirement being at the will of some hedgefund manager is not appealing next to the idea of my retirement being used temporary to help my neighbors buying a house or start a business.
But halting trading is not entirely uncommon. It's what happens when weird stuff is going on. I've never heard of preventing opening new positions while allowing positions to be closed.
nah this whole thing has been great press for them despite the debacles
IDK GP's circumstances, but my townhouse had a private elevator (also in Dallas)
I'm not talking about Robinhood specifically but general rules & regulations (see eg https://www.fool.com/the-ascent/buying-stocks/margin-account... ). RH specifically may have their own constraints beyond what's necessary, though. In which case get yourself a better brokerage.
Right. My biggest concern with these plays, at this point, is that they're not taking into account the possibility of bankruptcy. There's a ton of "they have to buy it, if we hold all the shares then it'll go to the moon, 1k, 2k, 4k". (1) The sheer variety of financial vehicles available to professional investors is staggering, and while the initial DD was really good, we probably missed something at this point, and (2) if all else fails, and a fund can't buy back the 50,000 shares it owes some brokerage, that fund doesn't have to buy them back. They can just declare bankruptcy.

I think these realizations are why much of the r/WSB discourse over the past two days has shifted from "we're going to be millionaires" to "i'm just in it at this point to stick it to the man". That's fair, and some people did legitimately become very rich off of this, but at this point, more funds are playing with WSB than against them. Funds are not some conglomerate that moves together; they hate each other as much as the public hates all of them.

Short interest in the past week has remained pretty steady. Some people view this as "the funds are doubling down, get 'em while they're bleeding". No, actually; they know what's most likely to happen, which is, everyone is going to forget about this in about three days. Gamestop's stock isn't good. These new shorts are not priced like "I think its going to go below $7"; they're priced like "I think its going to go below $200".
Warp vs. Actix-Web
Prof. Dan Gilbert's studies on Happiness seems to support the paradox of choice: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4q1dgn_C0AU

If we don't have choice, we manufacture happiness. Something we predict will be somehow worse than "real" happiness, but studies show it's not worse. If we have choice, we predict we will be more happy, but studies show we aren't.
> I think the problem here is actually the existence of the free plan.

Only because the next paid tier is expensive (even more so now).

I would absolutely pay $5 a month for a higher tier but GitLab doesn't like money I guess.
I expect the lawsuit will be about how Apple is requiring users to opt-in for companies to be able to track ad conversions in some places but not others.

Will require opt-in to track:

Facebook ad conversion to buy an item in Wish’s store

Facebook ad conversion to buy an app from App Store

Won’t require opt-in to track:

Amazon ad conversion to buy an item from a store on Amazon

Apple App Store ad conversion to buy an app from the App Store

Facebook’s proposed remedy might be removing the opt-in requirement, or adding the same requirement uniformly to create a level playing field.
I will disagree on that last bit, again, based on personal experience. Right-clicking to produce a context menu in Windows was easy to explain to my mom, and she very quickly started to use it everywhere to discover the available actions - and it worked. In mobile UIs, on the other hand, to this day, she is struggling to figure out where you're supposed to press-and-hold, where you're supposed to swipe etc. Quite often, she'll do press-and-hold to do something that worked in one app, and it doesn't work in another. Desktop apps are much more consistent in that regard.
Yep IBKR, although I’m biased. They’ve been the only ethical company in the business for decades.
The diamond hands are betting that GME go to infinity.

The short sellers are betting that GME will go to 0.

One will win and the other will lose. The question is who has the edge?

Just look at what's happening with the market. Brokers are pulling all the shenanigans to convince normal people to sell. All the finance media are shilling for billionaire vulture short sellers. Has this ever happened in the history of finance?

Why are these things happening? Does it seem like the super smart billionaire vulture short sellers have the edge? If they do, why don't they come in and make moves to drive down the prices from current levels?

After all these millions of shares being traded, why is the short still above 100%
There's that famous story of that Marine who fell off a boat and survived at sea for 36 hours.

https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-xpm-1995-11-30-951130...

I cannot for a second imagine the absolute horror of feeling THAT alone with god knows what beneath you. But imagine the good fortune required for a random fishing boat to pass by and find you.

Or this guy who fell off a fishing boat in the middle of the night and survived, two sharks at one point circling him:

https://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/05/magazine/a-speck-in-the-s...
At the 1 minute mark it still is a sphere and is a multi-cellular organism.
It's likely expensive because of the synthesis and quality control not because of the raw ingredients (not that they're necessarily cheap either).