skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I doubt many gamestop employees got to do that this week, but there was a similar, smaller drama also going on with a Blackberry short squeeze, and that might have gotten a few extra mortgage payments taken care of.
For me, the most frustrating example of this is the control panel on Windows. The new mobile-friendly menus exclude many important "advanced" (emphasis on the quotes) settings, especially related to audio and networking.

The old menu is still available, but over the years they've made it progressively harder to find. But when apps get confused about my bluetooth headset the only way to fix it is to pull up the old menu.
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/CSS/::placehold... for the English page.
> bought it alongside The Unarchiver and they haven't really been doing anything with it

Good, because IIRC The Unarchiver was caught gathering stats or sending something on the network, after an updated release.
If this actually happened the way that Robinhood is claiming, it is only because they were incredibly short-sighted.
Service and cluster autoscaling. Automatically allocating and provisioning new nodes on compute demand, and releasing them when done.

It can be done without k8s, but without something similar (e.g. Mesos) you're coding to cloud vendor APIs. K8s is like a cloud operating system, it gives you portable APIs for allocating compute and other cloud resources.
My sarcasm detector is on the fritz, what you are talking about is autotools, correct?
Weather or not Melvin has the position, you can look at the borrow rates and short interest. Someone is balls deep in shorts and they have to cover one of these days.
Unless you're targeting a system that doesn't have POSIX tools, such as Windows (which happens to be one of the most common OSes at there!).
Or you could look at it the other way: WallStreetBets used the Citadel hedge fund to destroy the Melvin hedge fund. Whose really driving the show here?
I love the trackpoint but it's an RSI creating machine in my experience.
Justin Kan, founder of Twitch and Atrium(net worth over 9 figures) tweeted that he got a tip that Citadel(the company that executes trades for Robin Hood) reloaded their shorts before they told Robinhood to stop allowing users to buy GME.

If you think Kan is a conspiracy theorist making baseless accusations, we see the world very differently. Which is fine. Diversity of thought is always welcomed in my opinion. But I am curious how you can have that opinion. It seems so clear to me, so I'm a bit confused as to how someone can hold the oppsite view.

https://twitter.com/justinkan/status/1354853920762253315?s=2...
I see some similarity, in terms of ruthlessly good design, to the Jobsian Apple era
The shares available for purchase is also a significant factor. Most companies have some shares held by employees/execs/board members that cannot be traded on a whim.
Making it look like you're doing things poorly when you're doing exactly what you intend to do is a real skill. It's the basis of a lot of circus acts. Making your files extremely large to mock modern web dev is maybe a little bit esoteric of a joke to be compared to someone pretending like they can't control a unicycle though.

What this comparison says about modern web dev I'll leave as an exercise to the reader.
How to Style Elements from JavaScript?
This is a demo of a Visual Sentence Composer for Japanese. Suitable words to continue the sequence are highlighted in teal. An internal state machine keeps track of what is allowed, according to rules of Japanese grammar. An attempted translation is provided at the base of the page when a sentence is submitted so you can get a feel for what a potential meaning of the sentence created is. A more socially-rich version of this is planned, with teacher oversight to ensure translation quality and intended meanings.
Best in-depth explanation I've come across so far
From some comments I read around here regarding the greatness of JavaScript, it would seem that a key benefit is that it allows more non-programmers to become developers. So, since I think it follows, one could say the benefit of those frameworks is that it allows more specialization and make-work for the aforementioned hoi polloi.
Can you really call Bisq decentralized when they've pulled moves like this: https://github.com/bisq-network/proposals/issues/61
Tomorrow is a big day. Option expirations, Max Pain, forced liquidations. Holy hell.
> Watching social media frame today as being orchestrated by some shadowy cabal was truly bizarre.

Makes me wonder how much of the rest of what social media “directs” and “nudges”. What other high profile events where all of social media happen to agree and line up on are not what they seem? Gell-Mann Amnesia is real.
LMAO is indeed a spac, HODL appears to be a ticker for a bitcoin company on the Canadian stock exchange.
There are coffee vans in Australia that park in school carparks (for parents to grab a coffee after drop-off, or teachers to get one on their way in) or near popular beach spots or tour through office areas at specific times.
I suspect this will be lost in the hysterical clamour, but yes, it is in fact true that trading platforms have to worry about systemic risk and their ability to work with certain capital obligations. The idea that this just boils down to some good old boy phoning up RH and asking them to pump GME doesn't stand up to very much scrunity at all. But such is life- the baseless conspiracy is easier to believe if you don't spend time understanding how these companies work.
I'm writing a primer on music theory, and I have this same fear. I resolve it in three ways:

1) I try to make the writing entertaining enough that people won't mind reading something they already know

2) I added an anchor tag saying "click if you already know this stuff"

3) I added tooltips explaining vocabulary words, so if you skipped a section and end up not knowing everything you thought you did, you can use the tooltips to refresh your memory.

These three factors I think combine in a really nice way. I'm excited to post it here when I'm done with it.
When you short a stock you sell it. Whoever you sold it to can loan it again. There's no limit to that.
There is no real-time-settlement for securities, AFAIK. They're settled two biz days later. RH, of course, seemingly settles things immediately vis-a-vis its retail clients. That creates the whole web (well, not a web, really, but a snow flake with a central counterpart which branch off again) of credit and collateral, which generally works extremely well, but comes to its limits with irrational price action such as this.

I don't see the lack of real-time-settlement as a vulnerability so much, but more the mismatch. But I'd suggest fixing it not by increasing the frequency of settlement, but by decreasing the frequency of trading (Tobin tax (which, funnily enough, is also called Robin Hood tax [1]); replace continuous trading with a couple of auctions a day; ???).

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tobin_tax
I totally agree. It begins with using monochrome icons and ends with something that is pleasant to look at but where nothing that is useful is standing out. As if they try to make screenshots to look good to hang them on their walls. Form over function....
I cliked your link and opened my devtools out of curisority, and every headline is under the class name "teaser", so it would seem the main intent of the site is to tease you!

Besides that, it looks like no one did any design at all, like what you'd get on the default template of wordpress or other CMS
Who is the user? Most "users" never build 99% of what they use from source. Sure a few things that they do build they would like control over. But randomly linking against things is the default because it make the package maintainer's job easier, and it is hard enough as it is to get people to maintain and update packages for distributions.
They are also facing a class action lawsuit:

https://www.pcmag.com/news/robinhood-faces-class-action-laws...

Be aware of the risks upfront when doing business with a company when you're not the real customer.
naked short selling. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naked_short_selling
> LMAO is indeed a spac

I had no idea, LMAO! I suppose ROFL is still available
Even easier to run pstrings:

https://github.com/andikleen/pstrings

I used it a few times to handle similar situations, like recovering text from a web browser.
I don't need a new framework for that.

The app I'm currently working on clocks in at 75MB of JS before minification.

That's enough for the browser to take seconds to parse the whole thing.
Alternatively - Airbnb selected investors that they knew would hold the stock and support their long-term vision for the product/brand.

Those investors being inclined to hold, did not sell, yielding a relatively small float that was massively outstripped by demand, causing the price to skyrocket.

Maybe some of those investors were friends of the bankers and cashed out but that would only be (a small) part of the story
Did TD Ameritrade, Charles Schwab, and Interactive Brokers face liquidity issues as well?
The short squeeze is to force the hedge funds to buy at a high price when they have to cover their short. This is the whole plan.
It's a straight dupe, same text, same author.
Robinhood Faces Class-Action Lawsuit for Blocking GameStop Stock Buys
No, it's a software problem.

First, try disabling TPM (because of a TXT attack from S3), cf https://forums.freebsd.org/threads/acpi-entering-s3-cant-wak... and https://www.darkreading.com/vulnerabilities---threats/new-at...

If S3 is not supported, it is usually due to laziness, to prevent an ACPI GPE storm and causing wakeups in S0ix. People who glue together BIOS code and ACPI tables are not the best and the brightest: instead of using a context dependent EC mask, they simply disable the GPE altogether.

You can add that back with a DSDT patch: all you need is a vector for PRW (power resource wake), making sure the GPE for EC wake interrupt is not masked.
Well that's the best explanation I've read yet.
> I aren't bragging

No offense but that's exactly what I felt you were doing on your first comment when you were talking about people having trouble understanding math as easily as you can. We are on the Internet so it doesn't sound as condescending as it would IRL, but it still makes you come off as trying to convince us that you're superior. I'm certain you're not doing it intentionally, I'm just trying to explain why as you said, are there tons of people online arguing that you can't exist. People with academic achievements akin to yours tend to remain humble when similar topics about intelligence and genius are brought up. I don't think they act this way because they legitimately do not consider themselves smart, they just know it's quite socially inappropriate to boast about it. On the contrary, again on a systematic basis, those with negligible life achievements almost always try to inform everyone in the room that they feel superior in terms of mental capability. Based on your academic biography above you seem to be an exception to what I just described and have observed both online and IRL.

> For my masters thesis I solved a problem that had stumped one of the more renowned mathematicians in Sweden for decades.

Sounds impressive but at the same time many would be quite skeptical about a really challenging problem being solved in the short, in terms of time, course of a Masters degree. Again, not attempting to undermine your achievement, but you usually hear about hard unsolved problems being a topic of a PhD thesis which almost always includes a number of publications being done during its course as part of it. I'd appreciate a few more details here but I understand you may hesitate stating more because of potential privacy concerns.
But the old systems, those with the "30 years of embedded knowledge of traps etc." - aren't necessarily POSIX-compliant. And there are different versions/parts of the POSIX standard. etc.
This is pretty rad on my iPhone. It’s be nice if it didn’t lose my place and my book when I closed the tab.
> Heck, my visa card pays me 0.3% nowadays.

Does your visa pay the merchants too? If banks/cards are are still charging merchants 2-3%, then some of that is passed on to us users as well (just not explicitly)
Wise choice. That looked like a scary spike, when it shot up to 452. You might’ve gotten margin called, or worse, just have your position liquidated, and you eat the loss.

But, that was today’s scary high. Then, it fell to the depths of 126, just 90 minutes later. Crazy.
> didn’t have the capital to clear trades of super volatile stocks

As long as people executing buy orders have enough cash or margin in their account to cover the purchase, how is this a problem?
> It's not clear whether the average joes know they're triggering Citadel's bots, or whether this is just Citadel's bet on frontrunning average joes paying off for Citadel. It's possible Citadel is the joes' patsy, and the joes are also Citadel's patsies.

I wish I knew! There's so much misinformation going on here. I still can't find a clear answer about whether Robinhood was selling people's shares legally or not.
Coinbase is the future of finance.

Monero (and other privacy coins) are the future of DeFi.
Yes, they are considered major services by a lot of people.
That will likely get tossed pretty quickly. There's no evidence of wrongdoing.
I wouldn't typically nitpick grammar on this site, but I believe you're trying to demonstrate a point and I want to refute it.

>> An average German sentence is probably 2 or 3 times longer than an English one, I think this has more to do with the users of the language than the language itself, if true it means we can make English pack more punch we just have to change our perspective.

Grammatically speaking, this should be three separate sentences. Your commas should be full stops because they represent three separate thoughts. You could connect them with 'and', but I'd suggest most native speakers would find this unpleasant to read.

I don't want to make it sound like I'm not a fan of long sentences - I think fiction writing benefits from a varied cadence. For business writing, however, I think short- or medium-sized sentences are less intrusive to the average reader.
Set up a redirect for a year or so.

In future use a domain you own as the email address and redirect to your email provider.
This doesn't seem to serve any purpose other than deception.

Seeing as Robinhood did do something that many of it's users may consider negative-review worthy, after all there's a huge class-action lawsuit gathering steam against it right now. It's not like these were bots that brigaded the app for no reason.

Granted, I wouldn't say what Google is doing is illegal. I think it's good to keep this in mind to reinforce the "reviews are fake" rule of thumb that one should apply to things on the appstore in general. You can be certain less obvious manipulation of these kind happen on a daily basis based on who is giving google ad money.

I'd honestly not be surprised if this action was automatic, simply because Robinhood is a very large ad words customers, and the default policy of the algorithm is to mark negative reviews as "fake" for large customers. Which makes it worst, not better, mind you.
Interesting. I'm not so fussed about the formatting, and the ticket number is easy to catch with a git hook. But the "ask for more details" is definitely what I'm after.
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/28/interactive-brokers-restrict...

“The broker stands between these customers and the clearing house,” said Peterffy. “So when some option holders make money, the clearing house has to give us the money to give it to our customers, while other option holders, sellers or buyers on their own side lose money we have to collect money from them and give it to the clearing house. If our customers are unable to pay for their loses we have to put up our own money.”

Explanation from the CEO of Interactive Brokers, which also limited GME trading.
Indeed. It was all done out in the open. Someone said "if enough people buy and hold, there will be a short squeeze. For this reason, I'm long GME", which probably doesn't represent a scheme or manipulation, it's just simple facts.
It's what I've come to expect from Cory Doctorow - I have no idea how he manages to write novels while doing all of this blogging as well.
Robinhood also told users it may close out some of their positions as it takes steps to reduce account risks.

How can this be legal? If someone is holding a large amount of GME stock which they bought at (e.g.) $300 and Robinhood closes out the position below that amount, they're forcing losses on an investor who was specifically holding with the belief that the share prices would go up.
San Francisco Cancels Abraham Lincoln
I've run into this while interviewing people for UX positions. They'll walk me through a portfolio and point out a lot of the aesthetics, whereas I'm asking about their decision-making process: how did you identify the problem? What other solutions did you consider and why didn't you go with them? How did you determine the organization of X? Why did you choose this flow? Why are you framing the task this way? Why did you make this more important than that? Why are you grouping this and that together? Why not these other things? Why expose this information at a glance and hide that information behind an interaction? etc.
> It'd be demotivating if someone thinks they can do your project better than you can, right?

This would be valid thinking though should the project go inactive.
Bubbles pop all the time, and retail investors get fucked hard each time. Remember the housing bubble in 2008? How many people got foreclosed on? Did they have a Robinhood app to protect them? Absolutely not. Melvin Capital owns billions of dollars, it's not allowed to get fucked hard. Robinhood users, on the other hand, have access to a couple million at most. That's poor people levels of money. There are no golden parachutes for poor people.
It has likely become not just unprofitable to focus on UX, but downright detrimental to the company’s bottom line. I say this without the evidence to back it up, but the anecdotal evidence is everywhere. I see it all the time as I preach UX improvements.

If my theory here is right, then the problem can’t be solved by preaching UX to businesses. I think it can only be solved by reminder end users that they deserve better.
...it has though? This isn’t a new thing. Happened with VW in 2008, for example.
At a social networking company once I brought up the fact that the post message to feed workflow required 3x more steps than any of our competitors, and that perhaps we should focus on making it easy to post. Design of course ignored it, as they wanted something "measureable" to iterate on.
Apache Arrow Support in Julia
Note Robinhood clears themselves so the same dynamic applies but is more direct.
No. Modern firmwares usually support S3 just fine - but it's patched away to make "modern standby" work more easily from the perspective of the hardware manufacturer.

With enough whining (ex: the Thinkpad community), the manufacturer can be convinced to replaced their half baked solution by something slightly better.

If you do not care about TPM, you can also patch your ACPI tables yourself.
We need more than protocols. Software that implements them needs to be as user friendly as the current social networks:

https://qbix.com/blog/2021/01/15/open-source-communities/
> But somehow, the metrics tend to be selected in context of what profits the business the most, and not what maximizes the value of a product to the user...

The divergence happens when the user isn't the one paying for the product; e.g. when the user's company is paying for it or when advertisers pay for it instead.
What's the reason for all the shorting on Fubo? You would think that a streaming business would be attracting far more long interest right now.
What does that even mean? Dont they hold investors cash, and use that to purchase shares when those investors want to buy?

Is there another fiction at play here?
They could have just completely frozen trades of these volatile stocks then? Instead, they only blocked out buying these stocks and still allowed selling. Did they not really think through the implications of this action?
Everyone said the same about reddit and didn't blink when the sub came back in 45 minutes. I think it's also grossly naïve that reddit is even the main player anymore. There's so much after hours trading going on that has to be institutional. DFV made a great call and everyone noticed.
If you read the various user agreements, you can see they have nowhere promised to execute 100% of possible trades 100% of the time, and explicitly give themselves the option to make the sort of changes they've made.
> why are we operating near-real-time settlement systems for securities if it doesn't eliminate such risks?

The firms that provided instantaneous-seeming settlement got the orders. And settlement failures were rare and correlated enough that avoiding them wasn't a differentiator. Then we got centralized clearinghouses and deposit insurance and the risk fell so far into the background that it's entirely novel to many market participants today.

> why these transactions aren't being netted and conducted as close to real-time as possible

It is technically difficult. It provides less room for correcting errors. And because real-time payment rails are fundamentally more expensive than batched rails, and if your payments aren't in sync with your settlement you've got a credit component somewhere.

> seems like a significant vulnerability

It does, but I don't think it is. Clearinghouses spread risk across a lot of people. They also help early identify daisy-chains, e.g. a single broker sold ten shares to ten brokers who then sold it to ten more fifty times and that single broker hasn't settled yet, and loops, e.g. I owe you and you owe Larry and Larry owes Bob and Bob owes me, of settlement risk. That's why Dodd-Frank moved many derivatives onto centralized clearinghouses.

That said, we've only had these since the 1970s. Counterfactual: we didn't have the technology to do this until the 1970s.
> is a different one

Yes, I forgot the "and". "that Graeber" lol. Pity there is no more "that graeber" :(. To think Chomsky outlived him...crazy...

> Or is that something you're spit-balling just now? :)

Pure spitball. If predictibility causes bias, try randomness. PRNG is fine except one could exfiltrate the hidden state maybe? So try something even more black-box like a hunk of radioactive something.

> Agreed on UBI

:)

> One thing I've been thinking a lot about is the Ultimatum Game [1], and what it would look like to scale up that concept to a society. In a sense, that's the realpolitik of every state: if the peasants are sufficiently unhappy, they show up with torches and pitchforks, even at the cost of their short-term interests. The modern peaceful version is "vote the bums out", but that's always been of dubious efficacy; and it feels especially toothless today, given the scope of regulatory capture and "manufactured consent" in the two-party system. The next closest thing (without resorting to violence) probably looks like a General Strike, but that's one hell of a coordination problem.

There is the quote "I have found out what economics is; it is the science of confusing stocks with flows". I had some crude thoughts in my own head, but with some friend's advise on putting in that terminology, it seems both that the stocks are are more fictions and the source of the economic problems of society. I question the ultimate game example then because it seems very "stocks first", dividing up some amount one off. I would much rather see "capitalism without ownership" or "rents all the way down".
Much of the outrage is caused by the fact that they disabled only BUYING of certain stocks.

Systematic risks should be addressed, yes. But a broker should never do such manipulation.
They probably have a wild EUA that lets them do whatever they want. Probably also an arbitration clause so users can’t sue.