skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Statement by the FDIC: https://www.fdic.gov/news/press-releases/2023/pr23016.html

Key paragraph:

> "All insured depositors will have full access to their insured deposits no later than Monday morning, March 13, 2023. The FDIC will pay uninsured depositors an advance dividend within the next week. Uninsured depositors will receive a receivership certificate for the remaining amount of their uninsured funds. As the FDIC sells the assets of Silicon Valley Bank, future dividend payments may be made to uninsured depositors."

The advance dividend presumably should protect most of the small-business account holders from imminently missing payroll. Presumably after that, there will be a secondary market in receivership certificates, and the question will be how much of a discount these trade at relative to the original account balances.

It's still a bad situation to be in, but it shouldn't be as thoroughly catastrophic as many seem to think.
That’s bad wording though. A fundamental building block shouldn’t be called an escape hatch.
I wonder if these differences in effect might have to do with the emergence, and wider adoption, of abuse-deterrent formulations of drugs?

Case in point; https://www.fiercepharma.com/pharma/vallons-abuse-resistant-...
Havent seen any mention of this yet but the reason for this is well known in the recreational drug community : amphetamine is a chiral molecule. The D isomer is more psychologically active. The L isomer creates more physical side effects. There is no regulation for the % of each isomer in the product. This means that one brand may be 70% L, 30% D, and a different brand could be the opposite.

I take this drug daily. The current supply crunch has meant I've had to take inferior versions of the product for nearly a year now. It fucking sucks. I need it to work but the side effects often mean little sleep, strange repetitive behaviour, absurd hypersexuality, etc.

Its a travesty, not in the best interest of the consumer. If you are on this medication you are treated like dog shit from the doctor to the insurance company to the pharmacy to the pill itself. All in the name of either preventi g addicts from getting it (who cares?) Or making more money for some massive company.
For posterity, the chefs kiss title of this submission as of now is:

“YC Is Asking for a Bailout”
I have the 65B Model running on my MacBook here. Honestly, I wish I knew enough about how to get it to output something useful. It's like poking a drunk librarian.
Can we get the Fed to bail out dang? Life will go on if some VCs go under, but this website must survive.
GPT-J is cool and all, but it’s been out for awhile and hasn’t seen anywhere near this amount of network effects. Further the Eleuther team is a bit detached from the “average user” in my experience, being all-in on TPU and JAX (which is still suffering from a similar lack of maturity making it difficult to run on non-standard setups).

I’m sure someone did the work you suggest to let folks run on this on more reasonable setups- but I never saw it on the front page here.

Did they achieve GPT-3 performance on anything at that model size? Happy to be corrected, but my understanding was llama does in fact outperform GPT-3 even at the smaller parameter-counts on certain downstream tasks due to using the chinchilla training regime (and other tricks).
That is the contract you are signing, so yes?
They were torturing civilians in order to extract political concessions from the government. It's not called murderism.
When you’re talking to people outside your own community, it’s beneficial to communicate in the standard language, rather than in community-specific jargon.

For example: “We have a simple request” instead of “We have a simple ask”.
SVB lobbied to not be regulated as strongly as other banks, and won. You would be perfectly fine at most other banks. This was a choice.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/mar/11/silicon-val...

Edit: https://www.levernews.com/svb-chief-pressed-lawmakers-to-wea...

> Eight years before the second-largest bank failure in American history occurred this week, the bank’s president personally pressed Congress to reduce scrutiny of his financial institution, citing the “low risk profile of our activities and business model”, according to federal records reviewed by the Lever.

> Three years later – after the bank spent more than half a million dollars on federal lobbying – lawmakers obliged.
Despite the attempt it’s going to be called a bailout by the public and press even if the FDIC turns a profit down the road.
Mr. Burns has entered the chat.
I guess why didn’t you spread it around to multiple banks?
Hmmm. I was told a long time ago that I needed to (personally) diversify my individual risks to the financial system if I was not going to expect to be morally culpable. The longer this list gets, the more each is morally culpable.
Shouldn't they have been paying for private insurance on those deposits? Or was this the plan all along.
> Are you saying if I deposit more than $250k (which is NOT a lot for a business) into a reputable and regulated US bank at negligible rates of interest I should just accept the impact of the bank shutting down due to events unrelated to my actions and choices?

Yes, because that is how risk works.

> And that my deposit should vanish into thin air?

No, you should insulate yourself from that risk, either by spreading out your cash between multiple institutions, or obtaining deposit insurance beyond the government's, or (most likely) both.
Yes. Insure against this if you like.
Agree.

That's exactly what prevented VersaClimber (a 95% muscle recruitment machine that gets it done in 4 intervals of 40 seconds on 20 seconds off) from getting popular. It made people puke. Apparently this is disconcerting in a sports club or gym.

To your point: it works though!
Nobody with a handgun would shoot you looking confused in an SUV you clearly seemed to be befuddled in. Use of deadly force would not at all be warranted in any State in the union in that situation.

Hell, we had a guy find his way into our caravan drunk one night, and the only way our having a gun factored into it was to ensure a police officer got the hell to the scene tut sweet.

For the curious, the guy was fine, mistook the vehicle for his yada yada...

Point being. Guns don't kill people. People kill people. It ain't rhetoric. It's a fact. I'd have personally laughed and started a conversation if it was my car, seeing as the individual in question clearly had peak taste in automobile.
Yes, actually — choices have consequences, or so we keep being told by "the market will provide everything!" capitalists.
I don't think "like the left wing of the French legislature in the late 1700s" is a very good description of what leftism means to people in the modern day. It has influences from what you describe, but also influences from many leftist writers and philosophers since. It's nothing like your atheism example, since what leftism means to people changes over time with culture, and even your example falls apart, because people when pushed people's views could boil down to "nature is god" or "entropy is god" or literally "there is no god" and yet all would easily be considered atheists by themselves and others. So they, too, are a varied group.
Circa 2000 I was at my broker and interest rates were high so I was interested in CD's and walked into to the regional bank in the office next door, picked up the annual report, liked what I saw and bought shares in Tompkins Financial Corporation which have beat the S&P 500 and paid good dividends.

As I see it TMP does well by its employees, customers, community, and also treats me very well as a shareholder.

One of my relatives signs off on the books for TMP. She can't tell me anything that she can't tell everyone else, but I've asked her about the question of "what happens if interest rates go up?" and I can say I like what I've been told.
Are you arguing for the abolishment of private banking and erecting a government run banking institution in its place? because it sounds like that to me.
It's too bad there was nobody who was supposed to be mentoring these startups, maybe giving them advice about business concepts like the benefits of diversification.
Is this the end of an era?
Why would you deposit more than the insured amount in a bank? Could it not be split over multiple accounts and/or banks? Or pursue an institution that has additional insurance? (my brokerage, for example, uses Lloyd's of London for coverage beyond SIPC)
That’s why there’s a vendor word in my reply
April 1 isn't for another 21 days...
The entire Silicon Valley Bank debacle was started by a single blogger in Austin
Let it burn.
If any significant payroll gets missed I'm getting out the popcorn, regulators and courts will get that back.
From the bank’s perspective, uninsured depositors are essentially margin lenders who can call in their loan at any time.

If your lenders are all from one especially volatile and incestuous industry, you put yourself at especially high risk of experiencing a run and defaulting. You need to manage risk and investments accordingly.

They took a high-risk position with eyes wide open and have collapsed as a result.
Lol, i can't believe what i just read, this leaves me speechless, the audacity
You don't lose everything, only a percentage based on what the FDIC isn't able to recover after the sale of all assets.

And - yes.
Source for SVB lobbying against banking regulations?
In YC it often is. You are almost expected to prop up other YCs companies with your funds. If everyone buys each others services everyone can show their super duper growth and nobody lost anything (except VCs who invest later).
CooleyGo New Resource: Short Term Promissory Note Forms
Should have started with “ We are not asking for a bank bailout. ”

Edit: my opinion reversed. I actually with the replies here. It is effectively what YC is asking for. It’s a matter of choosing who suffers: investors or private home buyers? Because Mortgage Backed Securities have been screwing individual home buyers for years.
Government interference in the economy is bad*

*Unless it's to bail me out.
This is an incredibly insightful comment. It’s a bit insane that the scope of the drug does not include it’s delivery system. Timing is everything for psychiatric medicine but also I could easily see it being important for things like antibiotics or pain medication.
I’m not an expert in the mechanics but I think there is also a way for private credit creation to run as a separate operation, similar to how loans were originated in the sub prime mortgage crisis and then immediately sold on. I’m not recommending that happen, but a similar system would allow private credit creation without the loan issuers being the primary deposit taking institution.

But yes private banks could also operate term deposits and pay interest to attract deposits to satisfy net flows of funds with other institutions.
I saw a claim go by on Twitter that (some?) VCs required their companies to bank with SVB. Frankly, the thread it’s in feels a little histrionic, and I hesitate to believe it. But surely someone here on HN can confirm/deny?

Source: https://twitter.com/bhargreaves/status/1634245405205471245
Wasn't more unemployment a goal to combat inflation? So wouldn't it be good thing for bigger economy that some jobs were now lost. Thus push inflation pressure lower? Meaning that any sort of action really shouldn't be taken for greater good of economy.
What socialized loss are you talking about? This seems like TARP, which was a huge gain for taxpayers.
For better or worse, Coinbase does not have a USDC/USD trading pair, or USDC trading pairs with most cryptos (BTC, ETH, etc.). For the most part they have USD trading pairs, which if you have USDC you're typically expected to access by redeeming your USDC for USD and then using the USD trading pairs. But since USDC to USD redemption is halted for now, you effectively cannot trade USDC for most common cryptocurrencies on Coinbase without going through one of their (afaik) three live USDC trading pairs - USDC/EUR, USDC/GBP, and USDT/USDC.

However, other exchanges actually do have USDC markets for most other cryptocurrencies. If you deposit your USDC with them, then you can directly trade order books on USDC/USD, BTC/USDC, and ETH/USDC, which function regardless of the lack of redemption and regardless of the actual market price of USDC.

If Coinbase had lots of USDC trading pairs like other exchanges do, it would avoid the issue you outlined in your comment, but it would also fragment liquidity across two markets that are effectively identical during business-as-usual periods where redemptions function properly.
I applied and sent an email nearly three weeks ago and never got a response. Do you inform candidates if there is no match?
Why is that? This is small and medium sized venture-backed startups, a sector that’s taken a tiny fraction of US investment but represented a major portion of its GDP growth. They did nothing wrong and were failed by their bank.

Why are small tech startups building something new less deserving than say, giant banks that knowingly took extreme risks in 2008, or giant auto businesses that refused to modernize and truly compete with Japanese competitors in the 80s?

I think it would be refreshing to see a cheaper bailout of small and medium sized businesses actually innovating and building new things instead of giant incumbents.
Private bridge loans seems like the answer here. Private bank, private risk.

Long term maybe just establish a “federal deposit bank” with no private profits but guaranteed unlimited FDIC protection.
Cloudflare has both static hosting + CDN. There are dozens of CDNs and hundreds of static hosts that you could combine.

GCP, Azure also exist with similar solutions
Not too sure about the move of putting this out in the open so transparently. Surely if I'm a customer of one of these startups with any sort of serious reliance on them, surely seeing their name on this list will make me ask even tougher questions of them? (who, I fully recognize, are unfortunately just caught in the middle of all of this)
Some of these "differences" can be life-threatening.

I'm on 30mg of generic dextroamphetamine sulfate XR per day. It evaporates my ADHD entirely, makes me feel much more comfortable and relaxed, and makes it easier to regulate emotions and stress. As a bonus it also helps me feel my emotions more readily, which I consider amazing.

But last time, the brand of generic that my pharmacy gave me was Actavis (owned by, guess who, Teva) instead of the Mallinckrodt that I got the first time.

When it first kicked in, I was in the middle of relaxing in bed and my heart just suddenly went completely insane out of nowhere. My heart rate was around 130bpm and I could not sleep at all anymore, even with generous amounts of melatonin 4+ hours before bed. My blood pressure was 180 over 130 for two days straight.

I eventually realized what the problem was and switched back to Mallinckrodt. My heart rate was soon okay and I could relax and sleep again, but it took around 4–5 days for my blood pressure to return to safe levels, probably because of all the bodily load that those Actavis capsules caused.

At my doctor's appointment yesterday, I had my doctor explicitly forbid Actavis and then put "brand medically necessary" on my latest prescription three times, once in handwriting, requiring Mallinckrodt specifically. Hopefully I will not get the wrong meds again.

AFAICT, the main reason it was so dangerous is probably because I am taking 30mg daily. But either my ADHD is really that bad or I started off with a very high tolerance, because my tolerance was discovered from having to take 20mg of adderall IR for it to do anything at all. And that just so happened to be terrible badness, so I switched to pure dextroamphetamine which seems to work wonderfully.

But only this very specific capsule from this very specific brand. The others might literally cause me a heart attack.
A bailout, but they want it to be called something else lol.
Rarsy – The AI Marketing Assistant I made in one night
I said I haven't heard of him before. I had done a cursory look up of him and read some articles and blog posts of his. So the context of his father didn't help because I knew it already and, like I said, is largely irrelevant.

> I didn't realize that was just a prelude to an argument you wanted to have.

I'm not sure what this means.
This couldn't be the same Huawei who has been caught repeatedly using DSLR stock photography in their marketing materials, while claiming the images were taken by their smartphones.

https://petapixel.com/2020/04/21/huawei-accidentally-claims-...
Exactly. It will be interesting to see who and what gets shutdown in the next 30 days if the issue isn't rectified.
It's absolutely mind-boggling that a tiny NVME M.2 drive can now easily match this performance.
On the other hand, many are.
> Ayn Rand just got disrupted.

Ayn Rand needs to be memory-holed.
If this is handled by the ordinary procedures used to handle bank bailouts and if the story is what we've been told (problems w/ bonds going bad because of an interest rate increase) there could be some haircut for depositors but it will not be apocalyptic.

If the real problem is the quality of the loan book, however, it calls the startup and VC economy into question.

We'll learn a lot more about this in the next few weeks.
It's a hobby. Once a hobby becomes a paid service, it seizes to be a hobby. I don't know how to articulate this concept or why it is. But, I avoid it.
Can I ask why everybody banked with SVB?

Are Wells Fargo or Bank of America not hip enough?

A bank should be like a gas station, you go to the nearest one given that the pruduct being sold is essentially all the same.

I think that what happened is that founders weren't the one opening the accounts, the VC industry took it upon themselves to streamline the process in order to free the founders of the 'burden' of having to provide the documents etc. So it was the legal office of VCs doing the opening and they were opening with SVB because VC funds are incestous and they have zero geographic and ideologic diversification in their non-portfolio business relationships. So they all end up using the same law firms, banks, consultants etc. Same reason why they all sits on each other's boards.
provided their main customer base is not from the area or the sector then it's pretty fantastic for them, especially if they had significant competition in their business model and many of those competitors are now insolvent
TLDR:

Sad face. I want your money.
100% agree. These titans of industry can surely help themselves.
I think you should be made whole, but only if you submit a public statement supporting welfare for individuals as well as corporations in trouble. If you want a socialist handout from the government, fine, but you can’t be a hypocrite about it.
Turner wasn’t an impressionist, and he didn’t make impressionist works. He died about the time the impressionists were born.

The invention of the camera had more to do with the transition away from realism than anything else. It’s not mentioned in the article.

Smog in the air would have been accurately represented in any artist’s work. It’s interesting that the paintings agree with climate science about the air quality in the area, but trying to say it had a significant influence on the style seems wrong to me. The school of style isn’t particularly focused on landscapes or the sky. Degas’s ballerinas, for example, are indoors.
I was just asking myself what was the us bank regulator doing. But this explains a lot.

Small government has its consequences
I don't really remember much about Ruby and I'm having a hard time

$ bundler
[... many packages listed ...]
Using coltrane 4.1.1
[... some more packages ...]
$ ./bin/coltrane
zsh: no such file or directory: ./bin/coltrane
$ gem which coltrane
/opt/homebrew/lib/ruby/gems/3.2.0/gems/coltrane-4.1.1/lib/coltrane.rb
$ /opt/homebrew/lib/ruby/gems/3.2.0/gems/coltrane-4.1.1/bin/coltrane
Could not find [... many packages ...]
Run `bundle install` to install missing gems.

but I have just ran `bundler` above...

help?
> the plan all along

BINGO
Didn't the public get paid back, plus extra, after bailing out the banks?
The one thing that mandatory FDIC insurance gives you over purchasing private insurance is a) the US Government is guaranteed to not go bust (and if it does, we're all living off canned goods anyway) and b) you avoid the situation where people don't do the responsible thing and then you have to bail them out anyway (this is also part of the argument behind government provided healthcare insurance, but that's another topic for another day)

Buying private insurance leaves you open to the risk of the insurance company going bust, and, it not being mandatory means people can take the risk and then come crying to the US Treasury to solve this unknowable systemic risk that everyone actually does know about--which we're already seeing heavy pressure from people to bail out these depositors who are above the insurance limits
These are depositors of a bank. Most startups only have one bank.

Startups should live or die because they create good products and solve real problems in real markets, not because they made an arbitrary choice like which bank they started using.

There's also a real risk of bank contagion if it is only safe to deposit in the largest banks.
> Are you saying if I deposit [...] I should just accept the impact [...] due to events unrelated to my actions and choices?

You chose that bank and you chose to deposit more than $250,000. Are you saying the limit should be higher?
I'm 100% in support of a bailout...

...with the federal government taking equity in return, at the last valuation, diluting existing owners.

That would let the businesses keep running, without the "privatize gain / socialize loss" merry-go-around.
Even if there are small companies I don't think they are in some honest business of producing useful physical goods and charging fair money for that. Most likely they are half-assed scammy SAAS crap.

Absolutely not sure why these world beaters hacking everything under Sun need to be bailed out by some stodgy old institution anyway.
> The banks had to be saved in 2008 because they were, like, the financial system.

There was a false choice there because there are multiple options that were strategically ignored by the people who own the banking system. The financial system can be replaced. The crypto people haven't been getting bailouts AFAIK and it doesn't seem to be hurting the ecosystem; we're running side by side experiments despite the best efforts of the powers that be and it is showing that in low-trust environments the system is actually pretty robust. The response should have been to get rid of the systemic inflation that incentivises people to give their money to untrustworthy institutions.

> Not interested in taking another spin on the “privatize gain, socialize loss” merry-go-round.

I personally feel this way. But as a matter of fairness, if banks get bailouts why shouldn't YC get bailouts? YC is a more deserving cause than the banks. This was always the problem with bailouts; it is grossly unfair that incompetent banks get a handout but potentially competent companies do not.
We have a simple ask: Regulators need to step in and implement a backstop for depositors. This is not a bank bailout.

What kind of double-speak is this?

How is "implement a backstop for depositors" anything other a "bank bailout?"
110% agree. At some point, risk HAS to be treated as what it is, risk, rather than just "another way to do things". We have so many banks treating risk as what it is, and pricing for it, well these people decided to go to another bank to get funding, well deal with it. It's not like the average citizen has this luxury.