skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Sorry, hadn't seen that response: yes, it's only when you opt in to UWP that it causes crashes. However, even if you didn't, Windows lies to you. If you ask for FSE (Full Screen Exclusive), it'll say alright buddy, and give you a Full screen that goes through DWM. I believe they have an article on that somewhere on the direct X blog called full screen optimizations, or something along those lines, that explains it.
Why are people entertaining this? So a guy called Peter was born with an ability to time markets.. haha good for a chuckle I guess.
So the plan is to turn CO2 into megatons of baking soda and then stuff it in abandoned mines? Watch out if water gets to it...
Yellen Says SVB’s Depositors Are Concern, Focus for Regulators
There's always the option to release founder equity in exchange for more investment. If the startups were viable before, they're most likely still viable now.

Already picked up some great deals and next week is booked dense.
Ahhh yes. History doesn’t repeat, it rhymes. And, this limerick reminders me of the post-1985 S&L crisis. But, no banksters go to jail anymore. Thing is, once it’s no longer politically tolerable through threats and fear mongering and some blackmail, eventually the government will bail them out again for another rinse - wash - repeat cycle. The schedule is likely as prior. Warnings. Government involvement. Followed by a market crash (a la 1987), and maybe even both a stock market and bank holiday for a time in the hopes back door dealings can paper over the concerns until they re-open. It’s either a cliche or a trope at this point. Not sure which. The FED knew what its rate increases would do to its member banks. If you don’t think the regulators have direct knowledge of balance sheets of its members, there’s this oceanfront property in Arizona you might be interested in purchasing. It also knew which banks could withstand it (either through no or private or public or both private and public assistance) and voted in favor of the chosen winners, result will be greater consolidation with the majors always coming out on top in the end and the smalls and mids either bellying up or taken over / bought out at pennies on the dollar. Double win for the majors. It’s an old playbook and publicly available script given the data (deemed mildly trustworthy). Good luck all.
Sweep accounts are fine, but I’m not sure I’d bother with credit ratings. SVB’s was basically as high as possible even for a few hours after the run started and before they closed:

https://ir.svb.com/shareholder-and-bondholder-information/cr...
On the other hand, it might be a cold, lifeless rock, since the sun can already barely penetrate a tiny sliver of atmosphere, as sunsets demonstrate.
I think you’re right from a rational, look-at-the-balance-sheet point of view, but I think that’s less important than it might seem. If people see other people heading to the exit, they don’t have time to look at the balance sheet, they join the stampede.

There’s already rumors going around about other banks, and even though I think SVB is a structural outlier, I would be moving money around if I were with them above the FDIC limit, even if I knew for a fact they were solvent.
Have you seen what Patrick Byrne has been railing against in the most recent years?

Maria Butina really played him and messed him up lol
The series is actually by Aphyr, and the first one is here. https://aphyr.com/posts/340-reversing-the-technical-intervie...

This post translates one of them from Haskell to typescript (very well IMO).
I think it has to do with Nietzschean slave morality and a media angered by losing advertising revenue to strong competitors.

The media is literally competitor in the attention economy, of course they will attack their biggest foes.
I try to ask chatGPT add comments to my code, everything is good until I found it modify code, too.
I don’t believe federal judges are allowed to practice and so have no need to be admitted to any bar.
I'm going to copy-paste a good chunk of my answer from an earlier thread. (Original: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35101797) - the article "The Demise of Silicon Valley Bank" wasn't on the front page long, probably because it was slightly dry and didn't provide any new hot take angles. But it did give out actual numbers:

> As at the end of 2022, it had 37,466 deposit customers, each holding in excess of $250,000 per account -- and -- The bank does have another 106,420 customers whose accounts are fully insured but they only control $4.8 billion of deposits

So SVB had only about ~150k banking customers. And of those, less than 40k are actually affected by this debacle.

-- -- -- --

The numbers are being mixed up, it feels. Only 3% of total deposits are covered witn the guaranteed FDIC insurance. The rest are spread across less than 40k depositors. And the average (not median, but plain mathematical average) amount on those accounts appears to be $4M.
it was a joke, reference to the DAO that tried and failed to buy the constitution at auction
If your strategy is keeping money in an FDIC insured bank account the government will absolutely bail you out. You have a guaranteed bail out up to the deposit insurance limits and a high-probability bailout for close to 100% of your funds through FDIC resolution.
Same reason animals grow to fit the size of their environment.

Same reason nobody has empty storage rooms in their homes, no matter the size of the house.

Things expand to fill up their surroundings. It’s like a law of nature.
If cybertrucks were street legal and available, I would go for that.
SVB itself knows which assets it has, and therefore the FDIC knows. They then send out invitations to bid to banks with the list of assets as an attachment.

EDIT: It's not only the assets that are being bid on, the curator could just sell those themselves. But SVB has (even now) some amount of intangible value in terms of relations with customers, built up expertise in serving startups, etc etc. A bank looking to diversify into providing banking services for startups might be willing to bid more for such expertise and customer lists than a bank which is happy with the customer base it has. So I'd expect it would be mostly the intangibles which drive the potential differences in bids, with the market price of the assets merely serving as floor.
> I think at least one person did: Buffett. During the pandemic, he put much of the free cash flow earned by Berkshire Hathaway on safe short-term assets like treasury bills, and otherwise used it buy back shares at a stagnant price. In hindsight he looks like a genius, as usual.

Banks are a heavily regulated industry. If despite that we're dependent on bankers operating at the level of Buffett in order to avoid failure our systems are seriously broken.

> But even if you're right that "no one expected" rates to go up, banks should not have taken such excessive duration-matching risks.

The issue I take with this argument is that taking duration-matching risk is literally the entire business model behind banking as a fractional reserve affair. Banks borrow short term deposits and lend further out along the yield curve. It turns out that when short rates rise this business model doesn't work well.

And central banks and the regulatory framework around banks exist because there's a large body of knowledge surrounding the bank run tail risk fractional reserve is subject to.

As a final laugh, back in 2017 when people attempted to do the responsible thing, and create The Narrow Bank, a bank with the express purpose of just storing demand deposits with the federal reserve so that there would be no duration risk, the Federal Reserve itself refused to approve the bank's operations because they didn't want to reward depositors for not "supporting the real economy" [1].

Remember at that time there were a lot of concerns about the US following the footsteps of Japan and not being able to generate growth or inflation. The federal reserve took steps to push people further along the risk and yield curve by lowering rates to negative real rates and signaling their intent to keep them there on a sustained basis. Then they rug-pulled everyone with the quickest rate raises in history. Do they really get to escape blame for this behavior?

[1]: https://www.spglobal.com/marketintelligence/en/news-insights...
> How are you supposed to manipulate a currency pegged to the USD?

To keep a peg you have to "defend" the value of said pegged monetry instrument.

That means when the value drops below the peg, the "owner" has to buy back the "currency" at a high enough value to keep in within the peg. They have to crash liquidate possibly long term investments, or use a credit facility. This is expensive.

As you know, the value of traded things is defined by the current buy/sell price. If you are only trading a few thousand times a day, those people who trade have much more power. All it takes is a few million, and you can trade between a few accounts effectively setting the price of the market.
Right, it is unwise to do that precisely because there are so many shitty bash scripts in modern systems.

I think the point was he was trying to find those shitty bash scripts - and ideally get them changed into something more robust (essentially anything else).
I think Garry calling for a government bailout is a bit ironic considering how into crypto he is.
He delivered it to the fourth estate and that's progress.
Beware the Variable-Maximizers
they are guaranteed by the FDIC up to 250K, and mercury has set up their systems to spread deposits across multiple banks, to increase the amount guaranteed.

so, if mercury has a 1M FDIC guaranteed, then you can move 1M per day through their systems with 100% guarantee, but the risk that a bank fails on one particular day is very small, so maybe you can move 10M a day through them, with effectively no risk.

10M a day is 3.5B a year. very few companies are doing transactions on that level, so mercury scales up very well.
It's nice to see Railway on here. Easy to get started with, generous free tier for low usage, pay as you go. Underrated!
Does Flashing Light Lower Cortical Amyloid?
So you haven't seen it.
Be careful, even copying and pasting the text can get you in trouble depending on what's in that text (I suspect this is one of the reasons modern recipe websites include so much damn narrative crap, as it makes it easier to assert copyright ownership over the work), but I grant I'm kinda nitpicking at this point, I agree, I think we're on the same page. :)
Thiel's Clarium Capital went from $8B in 2008 to $350m in 2011 due to bad bets and redemptions because of those bad bets... It then went defunct

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clarium_Capital
I'm with you. CDs are crazy undervalued right now. I'm not sure they will have quite the hipster boom as vinyl in the future, but I wonder if used CD prices will start rising eventually after some time passes and nostalgia increases.
I am not following your reply. Consider that you face two options for organizing your business activity-- you can operate it as a pass through entity of some kind (s-corp, sole proprietorship, etc) or you can operate it as a c-corp. The c-corp path will result in double taxation, corp tax and LTCG. But the combination of the two is a similar rate to the tax on income (e.g. 21+20% vs 37% top marginal).

Cranking the CG or corp tax rate even higher will result in more businesses with less diverse ownership, even if only on the margin, which would result in increased wealth consolidation.
Venture capitalists usually don't come to startups with gold and startups don't pay their employees with gold so they need a bank.
Depositors lent their money to the bank. They took a risk by trusting a bank to manage their money for them. The bank took their money, invested it and lost it all.

Let them lose too.
Here[0] is the open issue about TypeScript being Turing complete. The current most recent comment[1] is showing the type system parsing its own type syntax. Of course there have been many parsers written in the type system since template literal types landed, but I found this one particularly amusing.

0: https://github.com/microsoft/TypeScript/issues/14833

1: https://github.com/microsoft/TypeScript/issues/14833#issueco...
> said that they will honoring redempetions 1:1 from tomorrow

until they run out of capital/credit.
But what you're saying here is unrelated to the reality of the situation. Yellen has already said there will be no bailout of the bank. A bailout would be something that rescues equity holders. What people are talking about here is making sure depositors don't lose their money.
The series is actually by Aphyr: https://aphyr.com/tags/interviews

This post is a pastiche of https://aphyr.com/posts/342-typing-the-technical-interview
From the article, the conversions in Manhattan are producing apartments that rent from $3,500 to $7,000 per month because the conversions are too expensive for lower-end housing. There's presumably some trickle down supply effect but these conversions are not producing affordable housing directly.
Make sure you read till the end. Brilliant.
This is a dramatic misunderstanding of those two categories if investing, their motivations, and end goals.

It’s like saying an F1 team will now buy family economy cars to race with since their prices are down now.

You invest in a startup fund for extremely high risk high reward outcomes. You invest in interest rate bonds etc for guaranteed low outcome.

HN has become ridiculous.
Probably was shot with a Samsung phone
This is clearly a joke btw
Products sold to customers may not be assets held.
There should be a checkbox somewhere in your bank to put your money in multiple CDs in multiple banks transparently for you.
There has been a strong push for it in media, it's not just an organic shift in thought.
> embedded software: developers are forced to use hardware efficiently

Getting less true in low-volume embedded, where you can now throw a few ARM cores (or now RISC-V) and GBs of RAM at it for just a few dollars extra.

The payroll and time-to-market costs of paying embedded developers to lovingly massage and squeeze the application into the smallest device possible to save on the BOM don't start to pay off until you're shipping a lot of units.
Lol me too
I'm LGBT myself and have done plenty of (actual, on-the-ground) progressive activism and organizing. Not all activists act like this, and they bring disrepute to the cause.
What contagion? How is this going to spread to the rest of the US that isn't actually dependent upon any of these startups or this bank? No other banks have yet popped up with similar risk exposure so its not a systemic issue like 15 years ago and startups are not that big a part of the US economy.
The last time a bank bought another failing bank, they also ended up buying a whole load of extra problems that made the total deal very costly.

No bank is going to want to buy SVB unless there’s a clear and substantial profit to be made (which their obviously isn’t), or there’s some guarantee that the purchasing bank doesn’t get held liable for any of SVBs historical misbehaviour.

Right now, I suspect that every bank capable of purchasing SVB is taking a “wait and see” approach. There’s no risk to them if SVB and their depositors get fucked. And there is substantial upside to waiting and seeing if the FDIC is going to try and setup a sweetheart deal for another bank to takeover. So why would any bank move early?
> Maybe the standard banking model is broken. Banks offer a theoretical guarantee of the ability withdraw your money at any time and then just hope the situation that prevents that doesn't happen.

In this case it's not just a case of the depositor's money being tied up in illiquid assets, it's that the asset's market value dropped so that they're worth less than the deposits. This is slightly different than just the assets being "illiquid", because if were only illiquid, you can presumably pay off your depositors once a sale can be arranged. In this case even if they were able to sell the bonds, there won't be enough money to pay back the depositors.

>Perhaps they should require your consent to invest your money in illiquid assets. If they can't promise depositors liquidity they are cheating on their obligation in hopes seek a higher interest rate (profit).

That's... basically how banks implicitly work and one of their core functions (maturity transformation).
The only way the debt ceiling would make any sense to me is if it didn't apply to the rolling-over of existing debt. If you want a lever to reduce spending, fine, but it should only apply to things after debt-service, which should be automatic and unquestioned.
I had two back to back 10 hour flights on the same plane a few years ago. When we stopped we were not allowed to deplane or stand in the aisle because the crew had to clean. We had to stay in our row. It wasn’t totally miserable but it was not easy.
Interestingly, James Williams points out in his book Stand Out of Our Light that the technology of the "attention economy" doesn't does distract us from our immediate goals and into internet holes, but over time diverts us from wanting what is good for us.
Sorry this is ot, but I can't help but note: replacing "obese" with "body positive" is a wildly Orwellian linguistic move. They aren't remotely synonymous, nor do the groups they actually denote fully overlap (not all obese people are body positive, nor are all body positive people obese).
Panic is contagious. The real risk to any bank these days seems to be a Crypto affiliation. Fatal Bank runs happen if you have a group of people who talk to each other and have a large % of holdings in the bank (so sudden pull of those holdings ends up putting the bank under liquidity thresholds). Circle has the biggest or one of the biggest accounts in SVB and the stable-coin run or another factor made them rebalance. VCs, another large connected cluster at SVB got wind of it, and drained the rest. First Republic has VC exposure but not to Circle. There are 5 other banks that are affiliated with Circle and if any of them are struggling with underwater bonds, that would be a big problem.

There are a lot of interest-rates-weakened non-crypto affiliated banks in the US, but their deposits are mostly under the FDIC threshold. SVB had the worst vin diagram of all: Crypto, large average deposits, and very inter-connected client base.
>Taxation is theft,

I hope you refrain from using stolen property like roads, parks, and GPS.
An issue with SR-71 materials and fuel: it leaked fuel (by design) when on the ground, because the panels needed room for expansion when they heated up during flight.

https://theaviationgeekclub.com/heres-why-the-sr-71-blackbir...
Meta mates become cell mates.

I went with my dad back in 2000 to a “take your kid to work day” and got to hang out with him in his cubicle.

Honestly it was pretty cool. He had a CRT monitor and a calendar, and his desk space was minimal and clean. Others had decorated their spaces in unique ways. It was private and we could chat without disturbing others. It felt cozy? Again I was like 9 so keep that in mind.
This isn’t nuanced. It’s confused.

If startups were going under because it turns out that they were pointless and there was no market, and they ran out of runway… then sure.

But this is their house catching on fire and all of their money just vanishing through no fault of their own.

It doesn’t distinguish between good startups and dumb ones, real businesses and nonsense — how could you root for this beyond pettiness?
Did you see the HN comment? He basically said he was over redditors and loved the Convo on HN.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35107601
<Insert it is known GIF>
Absolutely!

The root cause is in this headline:

>>SVB CEO Greg Becker lobbied the government to relax some Dodd-Frank provisions on regional lenders in 2015. Trump did in 2018. [0]

All to chase a couple extra basis points (1/100 of a percent) of yield to increase the bank's profits.

Both Glass-Stengal from the 1930s and Dodd-Frank from 2010 segregated the investment (read market gambling) activities of banks from the deposit activities.

After a period of no crashes, they always lobby to gut such laws to increase their profits (of course privatizing the profits, but socializing the risk, which will fall on society whether or not the taxpayers bail out anyone).

Politicians who are fools comply with these requests because the voters will not notice right away. In this case, it wasn't until the next administration that we have the 2nd largest bank failure in history. Or when Clinton rolled back Glass-Stengal in 1999, it was nearly two full terms later before the banking system came to a new near-collapse crisis.

So, yes, root cause vs proximal cause.

[0] https://fortune.com/2023/03/11/silicon-valley-bank-svb-ceo-g...
It aims to be able to express the typing used in a bunch of pre-existing javascript libraries. Many/most of these were written in a "how would I solve this if the type system just let me do whatever I wanted" style (since that's what runtime dynamic typing actually does).
They disagreed, and the event obviously didn't do anyone any favors. The students aren't mad that he solely had a difference of opinion.

Edit: it isn't a simple disagreement that has no effect on the legal environment
There are certainly times when comments are important and appropriate (C code is probably a great example) - but I find myself more often than not struggling to understand if an existing comment is truly up to date (commit history sometimes helps here, but not always.)

Instead of commenting, I try to split out functions or variables that specify the intent. Since it's code - it must be up to date.

An example from this article would be:

assert(ep.send == null); // TODO: support multiple senders

Turning into

assert(notMultipleSenders(ep.send));
My point is about banking as a business model being mischaracterized as a Ponzi scheme, not about SVB’s particular level of risk exposure.

> Regular banks don't have the problem of having billions of dollars in deposits but no way to put that money to work

SVB chose a way to put that money to work, but they miscalculated what would happen to the bond market. I don't know how or why they overexposed themselves to this risk, but I'm fairly certain it wasn't some decision made without the review of numerous investing and risk experts.

SVB was not a fly-by-night operation. It was founded over 40 years ago. My first paychecks from the startup I worked for during the dot-com 1.0 era were drawn from them.
$206B in assets that were being recognized for their original, not current, valuation. That’s the entire problem. HTM vs AFS.
> Personally, I think two hyphens also looks better than just one

It's context-dependent. (Aside: you wouldn't write "context--dependent", which is the use case of the hyphen.)

Ostensibly the en dash is primarily used for ranges, although that's a case where I'm inconsistent. I won't typically write "A - Z" or the technically correct "A–Z", as I think in that case I tend to write "A-Z", using a simple hyphen. I certainly won't write "A -- Z".

The em dash is even wider—it's not typically mistaken for a hyphen.
unfortunately yes, last few places I've shot off a resume to hit back that I need a cover letter.

I'd be curious how many are asking for cover letters and run resumes through the HR grinder. I like to believe the ones still asking for them actually read the cover letter/resume, manually.
In an era when “they” can be a singular reference, worrying about the typography of various dashes seems like a pointless concern. Whether a hyphen, en-dash, or em-dash is used has far less impact on clarity than pronoun-antecedent disagreement.
What would it cost? I would take a $10k hit on a $300k wage to get a real office. Seems like a no-brainer.