skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Because it's good for growth, as far as I know.
> 2. The people running the graph do not want the graph to die, ever.

The problem with formulating it like this is it makes readers think that the set of people is a small-ish set of globalists or capitalists (or insert conspiratorial "others" as appropriate). But the set is far from small: basically anyone who ever wants to acquire debt for any reason (most common reasons include "attend college", "buy a car", or "buy a house"), or anyone who wants to profit from lending money to people, which is a fancy way of saying anyone who wants to invest money (such as buying stocks or bonds).
Ah, hadn't seen that trading was halted.

So... what happens now? It would seem that the obvious thing is you'd make a boatload of money, but will you be prevented from ever collecting that if the stock doesn't trade again?
Assuming the markets are rational ;) we take it as an axiom, but that is different than saying expectations are always priced in
Just link directly to the sec form
absurd take
It depends on how much agency you ascribe to the SVB team, and things could very well have been more complicated than the commentariat gives them credit for, but this was all happening in slow motion over months/a year (with an extra year before then when the writing was more or less on the wall).

SVB probably should have realized that continued interest rate cuts were gonna nuke their MBS, and sold them at a loss earlier, so they could recapitalize in safer instruments like short term treasuries.

What I’m learning about reserve requirements is that this would have actually reduced their “assets in reserve” though because they were allowed to use the maturity price of the MBS for that accounting. So selling them at a loss and buying short term treasuries would have reduced the amount of assets in reserve by that calculation, even though it would have been the same amount of assets (at the time of the transaction) in mark-to-market value AND safer against further interest rate increases.

I’m guessing this dilemma at some point got so bad that they literally could not recapitalize anymore without becoming insolvent, at which point their only option was to hold the MBS through further losses
But that doesn't work if the bank is allowed to put your money into T-Bonds, then your money is locked there just without the upsides.

And you can sell T-Bonds, they are as liquid as any other assets, the bank just lost money on it. If the T-bonds hadn't lost value they wouldn't have collapsed, they would have just sold the bonds.
One argument is: if font designers had to pick just one price, instead of charging a higher price to bigger customers and a lower price to smaller ones, they'd need to pick a higher price in order to recoup their costs. This would price some smaller customers out of the market entirely.

The comparison with a freelancer misses the weirdness of digital goods, where there's zero marginal cost. The work of designing a font is only done once, and then has to be recouped over many sales; since each sale involves basically zero additional work, any choice of how to split up the cost among customers is inevitably artificial, and not based on how much work it represents.

And of course, any artificial way to decide how much each customer pays is going to screw somebody over for no good reason. I don't think there is a perfect solution here.
YouTuber must pay $40K in attorneys’ fees for daft “reverse censorship” suit
Yes this, and car parking lots
I don't this is an area of corporate law that has been super thoroughly tested? But I think the theory is -

Look, we had $X in our account on Wednesday and did a payroll run that was more than covered, but then our bank went under and the payments never got there. That's not our fault, nothing we can do about it!

But as time goes on and you're still employing people while having no bank account, you become more culpable for their unpaid wages after you find out you have no money.

The tricky thing here, I think, is that it still isn't very clear what is going to happen and it'd be silly to immediately fire a bunch of people because of it. There is a good chance some other bank acquires SVBs accounts and things are back to normal pretty quickly. If that doesn't happen, there is still a lot of money to go around, so you aren't losing 100% of what is in there.

I think there is a good argument that it is prudent and legally defensible to wait a day or two to figure out what is going on before you go nuts and shut the business down.
I don’t get it too! There are people who seem to do all the things: multiple major holidays per year, fitness, kids, high work output, up to speed with everything on all streaming services, looks like a duck smoothly going over water. Good for them.

I get basics done. I do make time for
gym twice a week 50 mins and side project 10 or more min per day. I watch to zone out, usually some fictional cop shows with limited number of characters. Happy with those really.
Perl is dead like COBOL, Visual Basic, and Pascal.

There was so much code written in Perl it will be a long time before it truly dies. It was the duct tape of the internet for almost a decade and it’s still probably the best way to efficiently manipulate text.

Perl is dead, long live Perl.
Notably, chemistry is the lowest-level "layer of abstraction" on physical reality where this is true.

Unless you consider category or set theory "real".

I forget whether it was on Complexity podcast from SFI, or on Prof. Sean Carroll's Mindscape podcast, but this insight can be attributed to Dr. Sara Imari Walker.
> The payments are delayed in some cases, not held out altogether

That would still be a disaster for me. But I guess that says more about me and my lack of financial stability, than it says about anyone else..
> Hat tip to them

Depends on the price they got for those assets.
My paranoia goes the other way.
if by crypto you mean bitcoin, i'd feel more comfortable xD
sigh this is just straight up wrong, I was an RA that worked on a real time social media analytics software. We were able to pick up on things like likely covid infections sites etc.
Crypto was the first to fall
I think they bank with Celtic Bank. I think this because it says on the Stripe Capital product page on the bottom: https://stripe.com/capital/platforms

> Loans are issued by Celtic Bank, a Utah-Chartered Industrial Bank Member FDIC. All loans subject to credit approval.
To me, as an employee, that seems like a slightly weird take.

If my employer knows they can't pay me, and they ask me to do work anyway that is causing me serious losses. The moment they know they can't pay me, they have to stop asking me to do work. I would expect someone to be accountable for those sort of serious lies.
> edit-and-continue

Breaks on enough codebases for me to not be in the habit of relying on it.

My own "killer feature" of VS debugging is being able to open up a crash dump, have VS auto-download matching pdbs from a symbol server, and auto-view the correct source file version/revision thanks to source indexing - without checking out by hand and turning my build stale. Killer ergonomics.

Sometimes I'll resort to windbg/cdb for memory pattern searches, automation, untangling wow-mangled crashdumps, etc. but VS itself is a nice first resort.
What other banks that startups use have an exemption to Basel III? Would love to understand broader risk to startup ecosystem.
Academics don't make money from academic publishing. In fact, they often have to pay exorbitant review fees to journals. There have been many, many HN threads about this part of the the publishing industry.
Everyone else could see his plan to sell for the last six weeks.
Obviously Roku is a lot larger than your typical startup, but it's a curious blind spot risk that all the VC's who panic-messaged founders to take out their cash yesterday didn't bother to try to mitigate it in advance across their portfolios of companies.

The more money you have, the less competence you need - hardly a surprise, but... there are no shortage of articles that make it to HN with VCs talking up their own book about how great they are, so I think calling them out is fair.

EDIT: and it's also worth everyone reflecting on where their own money is, and how many things would have to fail before they can get it. If you are fortunate enough to have any significant-to-you amount of assets your rely on vs just living paycheck-to-paycheck or on credit cards... think about spreading that shit out.
You have to be out of your mind to believe HN is full of "FSB shills". Really, that kind of accusation ought to be banned on HN (and in fact, the posting guidelines strongly urge you to avoid them).

Let me reiterate: it's entirely possible for intelligent, honest people who are not "FSB shills" or CCCP agents or North Korean moles to disagree with people here on matters related to Russia, China or North Korea. Or Cuba. Or Venezuela. Or whoever the US is ideologically at war with.

Accusing others of being spies and shills is the stupidest of ad hominem attacks.

PS: defectors, especially Soviet ones, have a poor track record and were very, very unreliable. Some are thought to have been Soviet plants with the goal of triggering paranoia and witch hunts. Others were self-aggrandizing liars.
yes, i do belive that - there is clear and obvious evidence. there is no clear and obvious evidence that ppe (plastic aprons, masks) does anything. which is why we need a double blind trial.

i spent all my time as a microbiologist using only a white cotton lab coat (mostly for writing nurses/docs phone numbers on) , and often not that. nobody i have ever known that worked as a microbiologist has ever caught an infection. as i said elsewhere, reasonable common sense and aseptic technique does the job.
It seems like there should be an API for this problem...
If a “healthy” bank had a run, would it still survive?

In other words, are any banks solvent if a run happens to them?

If not, then at what point are banks considered solvent.

Also, if no bank can survive a bank run, would the CEO be at fault here for kind of inciting one (by essentially saying in the call “we’ll be alright, as long as you guys don’t run”)?
Three modest notes about premium bonds. Firstly, you can cash in bonds at any time, so it's effectively an instant access account. Secondly, the current rate is 3.30%. Thirdly, the payouts are tax-free.

3.30% on an instant access account is actually pretty great (best i see elsewhere is 2.51%; i see a six month fixed term deposit at 3.28%), and getting it tax-free without having to have it in an ISA makes it even better.
> I think you massively underestimate how hard it is to coordinate under these kinds of conditions.

I think you're unfamiliar with the Long-Term Capital Crisis, and the speed with which it was resolved (two days: Sep 22-23). In fact, it's partly because the NY Fed and big banks acted so swiftly and responsibly, that most people have never heard of this and don't realize how close we came to a financial crisis:

>The Fed came to be concerned that if LTCM’s extensive list of counterparties tried to exit their positions at the same time, it would create a rapid and widespread sale of assets, a fire sale, which could potentially impair the economy.

>On September 22, the New York Fed invited a core group of three firms to a meeting to discuss the LTCM situation. The core group, later expanded to a fourth firm, formed three working groups to consider possible solutions, one of which came up with the idea of a consortium approach. A broader group of thirteen firms was invited to the New York Fed that evening to discuss the approach. The firms disagreed over how much each firm should contribute to a rescue package and could not commit to such an effort on such short notice (Siconolfi 1998).

>The talks on a combined rescue reconvened on the morning of September 23, but were soon halted by news that an investor group led by Warren Buffet had made an independent offer to buy out the firm's partners for $250 million and subsequently inject $3.75 billion capital into the fund (Loomis 1998). This appeared a clean solution to both the creditors and the Fed, and McDonough advised Meriwether that it was likely his best bet (Schlesinger and Schroeder 1998). By the 12:30 p.m. deadline, however, the offer was not accepted due to reported legal issues.

>With no other solution in sight, the talks resumed with more haste inside the New York Fed. The consortium ultimately came to an agreement at about 6:00 p.m. on September 23. Together, fourteen firms put up $3.625 billion in capital in exchange for 90 percent of the fund’s ownership (two firms included in the talks declined to participate).

https://www.federalreservehistory.org/essays/ltcm-near-failu...

Coincidentally, this took place ten years before, and nearly to the day (Sep 15th), of the collapse of Lehman Brothers in 2008, which had also been especially exposed to LTCM in 1998.
And of course, the FDIC is not guaranteeing deposits of over $250k. What's actually happening is that the FDIC will take care of the sub-$250k deposits by itself and sell the remaining assets of Silicon Valley Bank (which they have taken over) to sort out the remaining uninsured deposits.
Its all the fault of the big government and all its bureaucracy and red tape, the government should have done more to stop this from happening to me.
Eight of the current HN headlines are about SVB, four of which spell out Silicon Valley bank. Shouldn't be too hard to put it together.
precisely, the maturation for the bonds were long-term. they would have been fine over time, if not for the bank run
Indeed, Go Is Great.
Hm, yes, I never noticed that.

One (maybe a bit involved) way around it is to route the packets on "server" if rolling your own VPN and setup the filtering there. It does defeat the purpose of the local apps though.
You ascribe way too much power to the individuals who have claim to capital vs the organizations that manage it. It’s really common to do so, it’s easier to vilify a person than a process, and conspiracies are really exciting. I’ve worked in the worlds of those that hold claim to capital and I know for a fact that yes they can make decisions given their claim that most people can’t, they are actually less likely to see their decisions happen because it’s carried out through a large organization. They’re also often subject to boards and other control entities. But more than anything, they’re not evil super geniuses. They’re people like you and me that randomly emerged as the richest people on earth through whatever process that selected them - business success, investing, birth. I knew one guy who struggled with profound depression and low self confidence but was the heir to a largely privately held major corporation. He would gain lots of weight and his jacket would rip down the back before he went out to talk to investors and he was so depressed he couldn’t care - he had to have handlers to change his jacket for him. Some are bipolar and their evil conspiracy like behavior is because they can’t control their mania and no one will tell them they’re sick. Etc. So, yeah. I don’t buy that it’s a few people pulling the strings of the world in a nefarious plot to make women in India work 12 hours a day because they hate women in India and want to see them suffer for profit. It’s a set of non human organisms made up of humans making millions of micro decisions at all times towards the goal of maximizing shareholder value. It behaves like a slime mold or amoeba, as I said elsewhere, a gas, and invades all spaces it can that are advantageous to it.

Here’s a concrete example: is Jeff Bezos powerful? Or is Amazon what is powerful? Jeff Bezos doesn’t work at Amazon any more. Is Amazon less powerful? Who is the Jeff Bezos at Amazon now? Andy Jassy? No. Andy is an amazing person, but he doesn’t have the power Jeff had at Amazon. So who is it in your evil capitalist genius rubric that pulls the Amazon strings? Absolutely no one. It pulls its own strings.
tl;dr Play the game. Watercooler politics mean more than your code when it comes down to who gets promoted.

Why all the stuff about hiring? As an engineer, hiring isn't even your job. You may end up participating in the interview process and offering feedback, but ultimately you're not making the hiring decisions unless you're a manager anyway, so ignoring hiring isn't really a mistake you make as an engineer.
well, does it say what to do with cream?
The media's breathless coverage about how Musk is a volatile glass cannon ready to collapse has been going on for practically a year now... definitely has an air of "Drumpf is finished" to it.
Future Crew - Second Reality (1993)
If crypto had a navy and nukes, then maybe.
Women Discontent with Digital Skills, Eager to Upskill
Ummm I am asking from my iPhone.
No need to attribute to malice when sheer incompetence can explain it.
Are you sure? The article says, "short-term Treasury bills get 100-per-cent weightings", implying that longer term ones would get something else.
Looks like a friend of Rahul Ligma
According to their filing[0], the securities they were forced to sell at a loss had durations of 3-6 years.

[0]: https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/719739/0001193125230...
> it's looking like one of them could be something like an LLM

I love your enthusiasm in this direction (I really do).

But here's some free advice I won't be able to prove for a long time:

Anyone who is currently convinced that somehow our fledgling efforts in the direction of building useful ML models are somehow going to yield a new golden age of neuroscience and understanding of the brain-- rather than the other way around-- is gonna be in for a long and frustrating next couple of decades, especially if they're low-openness types.
> The rest is then generally held in "cash equivalents" such as short-dated government bonds.

Wouldn't these bonds belong to Roku but simply be bought/sold/held, for a fee, by SVB?

I mean: my bank in Europe can go belly up, my stocks are my stocks and they'll be transferred to my new bank. They cannot be used as part of a bank "bail in" procedure (well at least I think and I hope that's the case).
Totally agree, but these tools do provide real productivity boons! Full Disclosure: I am a founder of Credal.ai for just this reason, our mission is to help you get the productivity boosts of AI without trading off your infosecurity):

One thing I'm curious about is what you think of the recent OpenAI announcement about not training models on data submitted via OpenAI?

http://credal.ai/
Researchers unveil new AI-driven method for improving additive manufacturing
The "Volcker Rule" bans banks from trading derivatives for profit, but they are allowed to use them for hedging.
At least they still have their keys (hopefully).
Ok, but please don't fulminate on HN. We're trying for something else here, as https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html explains.
You had time to think up that question and write it out. Was that not very much time? Did it not get interrupted?

I’m a stranger on the internet, so take it or leave it, but since you asked, here’s a hot take:

You aren’t being honest with yourself about how you spend your time. Reread your own question. 17 waking hours. Did you account for them all in your post? You listed a lot of things you don’t waste time on. A lot.

So what are you spending your time on?

What are you leaving out?

Try writing it down. Yeah, that’s stupid. But either you need some insight into how you’re spending your time, or the exercise will get you thinking about something you haven’t been.

That’s all just nonsense from a stranger though, so if it doesn’t resonate with you, maybe it missed the mark.
Yeah, more the latter. VCFundX goes out and raises capital for a new fund, which includes PensionFundFoo as one of the LPs, and once closed, goes to SVB and says, 'hey look we have $100M in signed LP commitments for this fund we just closed' and SVB says 'great - we'll set up a line of credit for you at [x]% of that $100M that you can draw down now (or later) to do with what you want' (obviously to invest in startups, but that would also include their management fees which GPs can pull forward and use to fund their lifestyles and/or invest). And then the future capital calls from LPs, including PensionFundFoo, go to SVB to pay down any amount of that loan outstanding.

The majority of VCs use this product simply to help smooth working capital needs and to be able to make new investments without needing to call capital sooner than LPs would prefer (also to juice IRRs), but there's almost certainly some minority that have basically taken an advance on their entire fund size, or at least a large portion of it. And now any of that cash still held at SVB is obviously at risk.
>ChatGPT doesn't do that

It can if you give it the option. My own openai chatbot prompts to either respond or to ponder by stating a question or considering a related idea. It infrequently will decide to ponder for one to about a dozen times as it restates an idea to itself in various forms, which gets recorded into the growing conversational prompt.

Elsewhere in the thread, someone mentions it always uses the same amount of time. In my estimation, it will spend longer on introspective or recursive prompts. Easier to get it ranting absurdities using those as well.

It's always the craziest chatter when the request takes a couple minutes to get back to me.
“HOW DO PEOPLE NOT STEP-STEP-STEP”.

For me it’s because that is slow, tedious and exhausting. Often you need to cover a lot of code surface area to find a bug.

Worse, the bug may be something reported in production in a giant pile of code.

A good set of logs will go a very long way to at least narrowing down where the bad behavior is coming from, and is generally scalabale.

The debugger is useful, but generally only at the extremes of “new to the code, totally clueless” and “really advanced bug that I need to bring out the big guns for”.

The logging approach clicks in really fast the minute you’re talking about a multiprocess program, being microservices or just plain old SOA.
I'd rather drive an RV or camper-van. Much more freedom and fun things to do.
Pretty sure it's just a troll. User has 3 comments including that one.

Another is calling someone a son of a whore(I think) in Spanish. And the third is just saying don't customise emacs. The 2 first comments were in 2021. What a strange account.

Do comments ever get deleted(by mods) on HN? Looks kind of like an account with lots of comments, all deleted, so it's just 3 comments with a weird 2 year gap in between.
Moreover, static typing means that every expression has a well defined type (checked or inferred statically, as the name suggests). Dynamic typing means that only values, ie the result of evaluating expressions, have types in any meaningful way. It's as far as a marketing gimmick as it comes, and there's literally a whole academic field in CS dedicated to it.
We can, but sometimes you get payments in the mail from businesses you only have an occasional relationship with.

You can pay people instantly by refunding their debit cards - that's how Uber drivers can get paid - but it's not free, which is why most transfers don't go that way.
Is their any evidence their books are fraudulent? I’m curious why you bring that up.
Can you imagine the conversation this morning?

"Hey, your paycheck won't be coming today and I need you drop what your doing and make an emergency change to our apis so that we can use JP Morgan Chase. We're going to have to skip all the usual test environments."
Sounds like you've got a clear understanding of the situation
It is not idiomatic C++.
That's a liquidity crisis, not insolvency. They were invested in long term maturity US treasuries! The safest asset there is (arguably)
Lol

(Just to be clear, is case anyone doesn't know about this, the above is either an absolutely insane or absurdly dishonest characterization, it's easy to do your own research)
Progressing into adulthood will make you see further. Hang on.
That's a liquidity crisis