skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
J&J hasn't released any numbers yet. Any such release would violate their study protocol. The smart money has been on late January or early February (and they have given statements suggesting this is true), but they need to wait for specific semi-random events to happen in their study before they can release results so they don't know when.

Novavac did give results last night. 89% in general, but 50% against the south Africa variation that everyone is worried about. (I'm going from memory on the numbers so they are off a bit, but close enough)

You probably will not be given a choice. Supply is limited so you take what you can get.

For now you can get either Moderna or Pfizer vaccines. They are so close to the same as to not make any difference. The only exception is if your allergist says something in relation to your allergies. (if you don't have an allergist you probably don't have to worry). If your allergist says something, then he can probably get you access to the right one for you - but you probably can't otherwise.

As for manufacturing, basically nobody has the ability to make more vaccine even if allowed to. Pfizer spent most of last year building factories, anyone who want to make their vaccine will need to spend the rest of this year making a factory. Sure a lab could make a few doses by hand, but we are talking about a dozen people making 10 doses a week: not significant to Covid, and it takes away from all the work they were doing before.
I'm not sure that the way you worded it is really any different. Stating that there were good, well-meaning people in a crowd of hateful rascists after a woman was killed by a radical maniac is not a helpful statement, and it provides cover for what was, by most decent people's assessment, a despicable display of bigotry and hatred.

I also do think that commentators are WAY too quick to impart meaning to Trump's words in situations like this. After observing his actions and statements for 4 years, I'm quite confident that he doesn't think much while he speaks. Words just dribble out in stupid ways "stand back and stand by" comes to mind. Trump never learned to speak or think with any discipline. So it's like he follows a Markov chain of words -- I can't say the phrase you've asked me to say ("stand down") because that makes me look weak. However, "back" and "by" follow the word "stand" with high degrees of frequency, so let's just go from "stand" to "back", and then for extra measure (because saying lots of words makes me look smarter), let's try another phrase - "stand by". No real thought of the meaning behind that.

And that's one of the biggest points about this individual. Not only does he have a complete lack of empathy and a complete fixation on himself, he doesn't communicate with enough precision to provide real leadership. No wonder qanon has so much fun searching for hidden meaning in his words; it's effectively just word soup, which can lead to all kinds of interesting crazy conclusions.
And you should read about how that was dealt with in July 2017.
"then look at all of the over engineering, the layers upon layers of abstraction, the obsessive need to keep making software larger and more complicated only to eventually tear it down and rebuild the exact same thing with the new-hotness widgets"

That could be a sane evolutionary process. I'm not saying it is, of course there are problems with the tech industry, but this process of exploring a space of possibilities with the tools you have, then breaking them down and building up a better suited set of tools from the ground up doesn't sound like a bad thing to me.

Maybe what I mean is, what makes you think the game is unnecessarily complex? Playing it, I was always amazed with how you become capable of achieving more and more with less and less time and effort as the game goes on. I don't see that it is made artificially more complex, it seemed like there was a lot of effort put into making the emergent complexity manageable at larger and larger scales.
Useful VSCode Extensions that we can't apply in my company because “Politics”
The same discussion goes for packing the courts, ending the filibuster, using Executive Orders... These things may get you what you want in the short term, but there's nothing that says they can't be employed equally well or better by someone you disagree with.
They would be fined minimally for lying about closing their position, peanuts compared to how much they would lose if they have to cover their shorts.
Yeah, I see it all the time. Just the other day I found out some coworkers were using this fancy framework called "C" to build their programs. The produced assembly was way overcomplicated and impossible to read. Talk about job security!
The Reddit army that's crushing Wall Street
I have to admit, this wasn't me to a tee, but I did initially believe manipulation of any kind - whether you do so to push the price up or down is illegal. My basis for this was from several friends who have been financial planners for 10+ years and two have lived off day trading for more than 15 years.

Then I had a few people tell me, "Nope, its called a "short squeeze" and totally legal. Then I had to go back and do some research on how short squeezes work. Then I found several instances where this had happened, just not nearly as public because of social media.

The small amount of research opened my eyes to the fact even though something may seem illegal, in the finance world, there's a lot of gray areas and details most people will never know about until something like this happens.
If you're trying to figure out the origin of a Rust project's name, the safest bet is always to choose the one that's a reference to metal.
Good luck finding a 200-m object at 273 AU.
> float your risky position

Nobody is complaining Robinhood disabled naked calls/puts on volatile stocks.

How is not illegal for Robinhood to disable cash accounts from buying stocks?

Your cash is transferred and deposited. If the stock price crashed, it crashed, investors still own the stocks with their cash paid.
Coinbase Freezes USD Purchases
Oh yes - and incorrectly configured on-premises systems too!
> But this aggregation is stale and when xyz is patched and months have passed you just have gigs of data that has gone bad, and just like rotten fruit that wont sell for much.

Not really. First off, I would imagine it would be possible to script finding people's servers and scraping it for data. Ultimately these servers will have to be hosted somewhere and systems like masscan make it easy to rapidly find servers hosting software that you can exploit. What's more, now the person is responsible for this risk level. Sure, a couple of experienced sysadmins like myself or you would know how to secure our data and make the server difficult to scan or probe, and difficult to access in the worst case, but how many users are actually going to be able to put in the time to learn system administration, to ensure that a server they are hosting is secure? It takes a lot of work, especially if you do not know the first thing about computers.

The end result of this will drive the introduction of businesses whose responsibility is to host these servers, and now you are back where you started, except worse! I can reasonably assume that just because my welfare data has been breached, that does not mean that they could access my medical records. Now however, that is not the case!

Secondly, even data that you would assume is stale, can be important and viable. Old phone numbers, for example, are still valuable as they can be used to construct a history for the given person, and often identity confirmation procedures require listing old information along with new information (A friend recently had to list places they had lived at to confirm their identity, which meant that they were unable to confirm because it was requesting a full list of addresses they had lived before they were ten (!)). Databases like Medical Records or your National Insurance Number do not tend to lose their value just because they aren't from this year data. Often old security questions and passwords are just as valuable as new ones, old information can be used to construct a 'good enough' profile and either used to sniff out newer more viable information, or used to aid the rapid generation of possible and likely passwords, among other things.
I agree that the AZ vaccine was safe and should have been given US approval. That said, this data is for a single dose compared to AZ's two doses so it is a bit apples-to-oranges.
Right. GME market cap was $250 million at a time when the company had literally $1 billion in assets.

For people wondering, "Well why didn't some behemoth like Sequoia Capital or BlackRock just swoop in and load up?" When purchasing such large blocks of a company, 5%, 10%, 15%, etc., there's a lot of paperwork involved.

Retail investors don't have to file with the SEC when they YOLO $200,000 on GameStop at $4 a share. They can shrug and say, "We like the stock."
It was just approved by the EU and is already being distributed in the UK.
American Airlines announced their intention to do just that yesterday. I wonder what the SEC will have to say about it.
>A doctor can't really just hazard a guess without actual facts to base them in or risk losing their ability to practice and/or reputation.

No, but one doctor might base advice on one study he saw another on a different one. Having skin in the game helps but it is also well documented that doctors might be overly cautious due to risk of litigation and thus sometimes chose suboptimal courses of action.

>Of course they are right sometimes but on many issues with a binary choice (should or shouldn't wear masks) that's a 50% chance.

No, this isn't a real coinflip. There's evidence for and against things like this, and some people have learned better than others how to evaluate such evidence and can definitely do better than 50%.
The flood of articles about this topic hitting the front page, and the flood of comments on those articles full of conspiratorial thinking, have been surprising.

Even during the election, the controversy following the election, and the Capitol riot, the front page didn't get taken over by a flood of articles. Something is different this time. It was not good. I hope it won't happen again.

The moderators on this site do great work, and I'm sure this caught them by surprise and they did their best. I hope a controversy like the one that happened with WSB and Robin Hood in the past few days will not be able to take over this site to such an extent again.
> Just look at how Steve Cohen, Lee Cooperman and John Fortt were shamed for raising what I believed to be perfectly legitimate questions.

Leon got shamed not for his commentary on the speculation around the stock, but for the complete failure-to-read-the-room commentary on his taxes, commenting on marginal tax rates and "fair shares" as "bullshit":

> "This fair share is a bullshit concept. It’s just a way of attacking wealthy people, and I think it’s inappropriate," Cooperman said Thursday. “We’ve all got to work together and pull together.”
You're right, I misread. My apologies.
You could argue that but you’d be clearly wrong on American law and jurisprudence. If the goal is to cause other market participants to lose, that it specifically against the letter of the law.
No, it wasn't. Melvin has definitely closed, although Citron may still be in partially.

Why are so many people repeating the same misleading talking points over and over?
Not quite - it seems like when you deposit cash, some up to all of it is made available immediately for trading if you're on the default account settings. My guess is that most users believe that when they buy stocks with this money, they think it is cash when it is in fact margin, and these are the people who got margin called.
Lol sounds so familiar.

I use Rico, in Brazil.
It strikes me that the outrage is free-floating and waiting to be weaponised by whoever finds the words to trigger it and point it at a target. Until very recently this was the pro-Trump faction; having stormed the Capitol and got some of their leaders arrested that has gone quiet. So there must be a new disinformation magnet on the internet - and this is it.

> These are friends I have know for years who have never mentioned stocks before but now are talking about "holding the line".

That's what radicalization sounds like.
One factor that plays an important role in justifying growth is scale. Scale provides lower costs so that sellers have more pricing flexibility. Pricing flexibility provides resilience. For example, Starbucks vs. Red Rock Coffee. Scale enables Starbucks to enjoy lower costs for just about all elements of their business and thereby withstand economic cycles. Scale enables them to introduce 'lifestyle' products into their stores. Scale enables them to experiment with more new ideas. It provides them with more data on customer behavior to guide pricing, product introduction, as well as on how to set wages and structure employee benefits.

To be sure, scale also presents business challenges that Red Rock will never see. Product consistency among stores, supply chain management, public financial reporting and all the associated liabilities are non-issues for Red Rock.

I'd also point out, as several others have, that electronics and computing introduce an element of ephemeris into all businesses. Drinking sake is almost a ritual. Ritual relies on heritage in order to be meaningful. Hence, by its nature, it's not to change and claiming an 850 year legacy makes it all the more meaningful. The smartphone in your pocket has the inverse attribute. The older it gets, the more likely you'll infer scorn from your colleagues.
Seriously, based on the answers here we should all be storing our data offline.

Realistically what will happen if we don't provide people with good self hosted free software is someone will instead provide them with Facebook and Google ad based software.
a) It's not clear these were margin calls. If they were, absolutely, they were in the right. If these were cash accounts, this would be... bad.

b) The MM's almost certainly didn't force RH to shut down buys. Current speculation is it was likely a combination of pressure from clearing houses and their own internal risk management.

Odds are they didn't have enough capital on hand to deal with settlement given the level of volatility, and if they let more people buy, it would've pushed them over allowable levels.

This is supported by the fact that they've drawn down about 500mm from debt facilities and announced a 1B funding raise this morning (https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/29/technology/robinhood-fund...), while throttling purchases of GME to no more than 5 shares per account and no more than 10 options contracts (https://robinhood.com/us/en/support/articles/changes-due-to-...).

And note, I say this is speculation because RH has been completely opaque about what happened here. All they say is "we have regulatory requirements", and we're left filling the blanks.

Edit: In fairness to RH, I should note that in their blog post on the topic (https://blog.robinhood.com/news/2021/1/28/an-update-on-marke...) from late yesterday they mention:

"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."

This does obliquely point to the issues I mention above, and is enough to unpack what happened here if you have an understanding of the structural mechanics of stock trading. Though it'd be nice if they were a lot more direct in their language, here. If I was a layman investor this'd look like meaningless obfuscation.

But it's certainly (somewhat) better than some of the early interviews and reporting...
>Or how trickle down economics is also endorsed by experts.

Trickle-down economics is not explicitly endorsed by anyone, because it's a pejorative. That's like saying "totalitarianism is popular in some countries"; you might think those countries are totalitarian, but they don't.
Ok, but if they had banned selling and there was a large price drop anyway (forcing investors to eat a loss, unable to sell), they would have been catastrophically screwed legally.
The level1techs forums seems to have a lot of people with similar interests
Is it really necessary for every tech platform to track everything I do? Can't we just have services that deliver a product without data collection? These are obviously silly questions as the answer is no. Not until consumers actively petition and shun this sort of behaviour. And more importantly, vote with their wallet.

Guess I'm off Spotify now...
Sorry, but I take issue with that statement: 100% protection against death and hospitalization for a tiny minority that are susceptible.

Your statement makes it sound like everyone that gets it will die when that is absolutely not true.

In fact, the statistics show the exact opposite: here in the UK, for example, only around 400 people under the age of 70 (I think!) that have no underlying symptoms, have actually died from COVID.

Edit: Oh here we go again... drive-by downvotes. Care to state your reasons?
There's also a part of me that wonders if novelty is overrated. I'm less familiar with the history of board games, but, at least in video games, my impression is that many really clever ideas never really go anywhere, and, of the ones that do, the first game to incorporate a mechanic rarely ends up also being one of the ones that put it to the best use.
Ah the classic "How dare you" response when being called out for hypocrisy.
Qt Creator's debugger is almost perfect for my goals. It's, probably, the most user-friendly. However, I wish I could feed gdb commands directly to it.
Do Robinhood's terms guarantee that their users can buy any stock at any time? Does Robinhood in any way ask or imply that their users cannot use another service? I'm just not sure what trust they betrayed here.
I don’t agree. See Tesla. Elon frakked up with the SEC but not his customers (or his fans) and so Tesla a couple years later is on top of the world. I doubt Robinhood will survive this. They built their whole brand around rallying for the little guy at the expense of the fat cats. It’s literally their name.
Again you are grossly generalizing. Wealth disparity gap is one of the widest compared to other demographics.

Basing your model on stereotypes and statistics is exactly why we have the issues I spoke about earlier.

> If you’re confused about any of this, your model is broken. All you need to know is that East Asians are high IQ (within 0.3stddev of anglo or Germanic whites). This predicts everything else, including economic outcomes.

wait wait wait. So you think IQ and race are correlated. So Africans are poor because they have low IQ is what you are saying.

> Slurs against Asians are less offensive because the connotation of being Asian is bad.

wow. I can't believe I just read this on HN. "Its okay to be a little racist to Asians because nobody thinks its offensive". Who are you?

Sounds like you have a really skewed view of Asians (who are we even talking about? East Asians? South Asians? South East Asians?

> Slurs like “kraut” or “nip” don’t really have any weight because they’re basically complements.

WTF??? Who are you to gatekeep what is offensive and what isnt'?

I just read you trying to justify racism against Asians. HN has truly fallen far from grace.
I'm very skeptical of this. It doesn't seem like something that could scale. By accessing database files through PHP, you are begging for race conditions while serving multiple requests simultaneously. At best, you will hit write-errors while other requests are working with the file. SQLite has a good explanation of the problem here: https://sqlite.org/faq.html#q5
Very cool. Thank you for your explanation :)
"We think Watson was a missed opportunity, so we called our algorithm Sherlock."

Agree with the first part enough that I wouldn't even want the near association :)
>At some point governments will have to address the elephant in the room.

Crime?

If a community is suffering from a very high crime rate (and some American cities are amongst the most violent cities in the world) - why are we prioritizing one set of rights (right to privacy) over another (right to personal security, right to raise children in a safe environment)? In many cases, you can't have one with the other. Privacy or Personal security - pick one.

And there is a class component to this. If you live in a nice safe (and affluent) neighborhood, I'm sure privacy is much more important to you because you don't have to worry about your children being hurt by or recruited into gangs on the way to school. You don't have to worry about getting mugged or assaulted walking to the store. If you live in a community with a high crime rate, are you sure you want to focus on privacy and rights of criminals?
Hi Keith, what do you think about CytoDyn (cydy)? Their monoclonal drug Leronlimab has 3 different clinical trials with FDA and are FAST TRACKED. They've also applied for an upgrade to NASDQ. Current price $5.38. Their suppose to release results any day now on the COVID trial.
A lot of folks are long-time holders (hodlers) and I bet many are scrambling to try and cash in on this run. A lot of exchanges (and even Robinhood) have limited or halted Doge trading, and the network is overloaded with folks trying to sync old wallets and whatnot. Very chaotic situation, but I imagine the price will drop once more people figure out how to cash in. The coin inflates infinitely so it's all fun, games and short-term speculation in my view.
> Why is everyone getting mad at Robinhood?

They were the first to suddenly block buying (but not selling!) GME when everyone in retail wanted to buy, and they refuse to explain why.

> Wasn't it the market makers who stopped them from trading GME?

Who knows? They refuse to explain anything.

> And doesn't Robinhood have the right to sell margin stocks bought on margin?

Yes. That part of the anger is misplaced. But it's not a significant part of the drama anyway.
Double Your Net Worth with Cryptocurrencies in the Next 12 Months?
Ask how to do something, and you'll get nothing, but just tell the Internet something is hard, and you'll get loads of answers :)
Why do you believe that the FDA is holding them back?

So far the process appears to be approval after the minimum of safety and effectiveness testing. This means that people won’t waste time or be harmed by a failed vaccine candidate. I don’t work in medicine and am just a bystander like most. Is there something I am missing?
I think it is useful, as it can imply that the experts have some explaining to do.

In this particular instance something seems to be fundamentally broken.
I didn’t mean to imply anything about who should be permitted to post or the subject matter of posts. My apologies that it came across that way. I simply meant it as an observation.

I could explain, as you suggest, and so could other experts. In my experience the likelihood of a response with denials, shifting goalposts or similar is much higher than an acknowledgement and gratitude for education. I’ll pass, but others might enjoy the challenge.
This is unfortunately an ignorant statement.

During the Swine Flu epidemic, British health care workers were given an untested vaccine. It left many of them with lingering health problems like narcolepsy. This is what happens when things are unsafely and quickly distributed.
The CEO denied anyone else influenced them to do what they did yesterday.
Drugs are much more rigorously evaluated than medical devices. It's just a quirk of the FDA that medical devices aren't nearly as well regulated or tested.
If anything Robinhood allowing people to continue buying volatile assets while not being able to meet their clearing house's requirements would be something to run them afoul of the SEC.