skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
usb-c and my choice of a web browser and im in
> Many of the governed see what policymakers and politicians call 'systemic risk' and 'instability' as a not so unwelcome wildcard considering that the wealthy of today are mostly descendants of wealthy land owners from the times of the Crusades.

I'm curious if you have a citation to support that the wealthy in the US are descendants of wealthy land owners from the times of the Crusades at a substantially greater rate than the general population.

> Where are the Fed , D.C. , the FDIC etc. when a gas station goes belly up?

How much of their going belly up was due to Fed policy? Particularly driving and holding interest rates to near zero through market actions then pushing interest rates to nearly 5%?
Fractional reserve is inherently financially unstable. Investing deposits while simultaneously promising to pay them on demand is inherently financially unstable. There’s over 100 years repeatedly demonstrating this. Like clockwork, this exact scenario gets repeatedly demonstrated.
Poor messaging amplified by speed of light communications (twitter) and fast online redemptions. We're in a new era of flash mob bank runs. Likely time for a rethink on regulations - like moving to daily mark-to-market of bank security holdings.
>British expat would have little problem moving to US,

Yeah it's the lack of integration/internal market/capital that really disadvantages UK who is #3 in scientific output, respectable per capita basis as well. Low switching costs less factor on pure science than ability to commercialize/convert into value add, i.e. actually making stuff. Which others have covered under culture, IMO medium/large sized countries like UK need to work twice as hard for 10% advantage to stay competitive like east Asia. This isn't the 60s anymore where half the globe is rebuilding/playing catchup, it's not enough to just work smart/efficiently when competitors working smart but also _hard_, even if hard is less efficient but eeks out enough extra competitiveness to matter.
You have no variable capital / are not a capitalist. You’re a laborer.
> VC's and YC have burned a lot of credibility overnight with their tech employees during this mask-off moment

Why? It should be other way round. They worked hard to make sure that payrolls are met and jobs are secure, that is my most important expectation from my management and investors.
Circle was 1% of SVB’s assets. First there was a run on the (traditional, regulated) SVB because VCs caught a whiff of desperation and told all their portfolio companies to exit. Next came the run on USDC because $3 billion was locked inside SVB.

Contagion spreading to non-mega banks because the federal government told them to buy “risk free” treasuries and mortgage backed securities. Rates go up and suddenly if they need cash the bonds must be sold at a loss.

To blame a problem caused by central banking on crypto is absurdity to the highest level.
I'm not sure who you're arguing with about GA and self-hosted Plausible. I use each, for different projects in different circumstances.

> Even if you're a non-profit, if your website analytics on 500k monthly views isn't helping maximize donations by more than $42/month, you're doing something wrong.

Again, not every website exists to make money. My friend's foodie blog. My wife's not-for-profit farm project homepage. My local community discussion forum. The little page I threw together to support another friend's open source project. Going back to the original comment, these sites 1) could use analytics that respect visitor's freedom and 2) have a budget of fewer than $42 a month for the entire project.

You might be surprised at how many zero-budget hobby sites get to 500k page views a month. Especially discussion forums. I think I may have hit that threshold with a WarCraft II discussion forum I ran when I was a teen in the 90s. But back then, we stuck anything on our sites with abandon, including the "hit counters" I used for "analytics", and all sorts of guestbooks and other nonsense. Not just JavaScript, we'd drop Perl and PHP scripts straight into our CGI-BIN folders that did who-knows-what with user data. I just would have hoped the state of web analytics for the hobbyist website operator wouldn't be quite so depressing 25 years later.
Federal student loans can’t, absent unusual circumstances, drive anyone into bankruptcy. The government offers income contingent payment plans. You only have to pay if you make enough income. The same thing that happens in a restructuring bankruptcy, which most people have to use after bankruptcy reform, already happens with student loans automatically.

This is also why it is so nuts to suspend payments for three years “because Covid.” Anyone that suffered financially already had their loan payments adjusted down and if you didn’t suffer financially why can’t you pay your loans?
"If the bank collapses then many startups shut down."

No, the equity gets wiped out, and if it's a good idea/good business it persists and gets funding elsewhere.

"You say it's a bunch of rich people profiting. Who are these rich people you're talking about? Bank management? They went to zero overnight. Shareholders? zero. Who's left? Garry Tan? He has the same incentives as millions of Americans whose retirement savings are parked in VC funds."

The VCs and other equity holders of the SVB depositors. Financial markets work: they could have sold their uninsured deposits at a discount, made payroll, with equity eating the loss.
If loaning or borrowing money were free, they could have covered every withdraw.

Im pushing back on the specific idea that paying full price for an asset that is locked up for 10 years isn't a loss.
the problem is if I sell my own investments right now at loss nobody will come to pay my obligations. so why large institutions get to reap profit but get out of jail free when they screw up.. one set of rule for common man and another for investor..elite class.
What Is Recursion? [pdf]
On some level I don't get this. Ultimately a bank is providing depositors a service. Maybe their interests rates weren't the absolute highest, but they were still solid AND they were able to spend a ton on marketers, engineers, reps etc. to keep clients happy.

Presumably there was a reason so many people choose them. They could have said "hey in order to make sure your money is safe we are actually going to offer a slate of services on par with our competitors" but instead they said "we are going to offer a slate of services equal or better than our competitors in every category"
Isn't there a more reliable indicator? That the contents are either clean or dirty?
In Argentina we changed the mandatory "13th month" in December to a mandatory "half month" in July and another "half month" in December.
Crypto undergoes hard-forks when "special" circumstances arise. It's not immune to unpredictable events.
It's April 13 2020 at 10:45 UTC-4 according to the metadata

<script type="application/ld+json">
{
"@context": "https://schema.org",
"@id": "#articleSchema",
"datePublished": "2020-04-13T10:45:12.734-04:00",
"dateModified": ""
}
</script>
It is already substantially higher than $250k because you can spread your funds between multiple banks. There are even cash management accounts from Fidelity and others that automatically place your funds with multiple banks to get higher insurance levels for larger amounts of cash. Their Fidelity cash management account allows you to spread cash among 26 different banks so you could have 6.5 million FDIC insured. Fidelity isn't the only financial institution to offer this service.
How is the bank “saved”?

All it’s assets seized, all shareholders removed, all leadership let go.

The banks customers are saved, the bank is dissolved.
I'm considering leaving the country as soon as I'm able to also.

The thing that concerns me the most is that I believe many people here have a fundamental misunderstanding of challenges we face as a country, and our class divide seems to contribute to this misunderstanding. As someone who comes from a poorer background and now socialises with people who are fairly affluent it's always surprising to me to see how much misunderstanding exists between the rich and poor in the UK. It's so bad that people often accuse me of lying or have no ability to related to what I'm saying.

I've tried to remain hopeful, but I'm starting to come to accept the answers politicians provide for our problems will always more of the same: higher taxes, more spending, more immigration, etc. If we want go get out of this mess I think we're going to need some new ideas and some very stronger leaders who are willing to make very unpopular decisions.

This isn't xenophobia. I can explain my reasoning here if need be. Have I to say this because some people are likely to assume bad faith.
They did make ventilators at scale. Covid's a bad example IMO, mostly because there was and is so much politics around the issue that there wasn't really a concerted push from government at the time. From the outside the administrations looked like it had to be dragged kicking and screaming to solve that problem.
this is so fucked I hate these evil SV libertarian crooks. this is wrong
What innocent? They could have sold the uninsured deposits at a discount, made payroll, and let the equity eat the loss. Instead they went on an embarrassing bailout begging extravaganza and unfortunately succeeded. Nobody, ever, should take any of these people seriously again.
Over the course of my career I've moved from Emacs (in-terminal), to Spacemacs (emacs mode), to Spacemacs (vim mode), to Doom Emacs (vim mode), to neovim (in-terminal).

After a while of using both emacs and vim text editing, I found the vim way much easier for me. I used emacs with "evil mode" (vim keybindings) for a long time, but I wasn't using all of the other features the author here speaks about. So I found it easier to run Neovim alone instead of the extra complexity of getting emacs to behave like vim.
Ha, well, I was clearly wrong. But the feedback I got was that of crypto bros asking for bailouts resembling a frathouse, after a loud and nightlong party, torching the house and telling their neighbours they'd better help out else their homes will burn too.
I don't know honestly, never been to any of these places and after moving around several times within the US I realize how nice it is to just be setted in one place, but here's what I would consider: Netherlands (I really like biking), Germany (Cologne seems like a nice vibe), France (Probably Paris, Food obviously, but I also really appreciate people's willingness to protest stuff)
It’s really more this current iteration of capitalism.

It’s not so much the cronyism itself but just how large of a chunk of the pie they took this time. See salary vs house price trends. The remainder is so small that basic structures of society are starting to collapse (can’t afford education, house, kids, healthcare etc)

Had it not been turned up to 11 this could keep going.
Okay? I’m trying to buy my first home, who’s going to give me a home? Another bank is getting a bailout and they have the gaul to call it not-a-bailout bailout?

This is all so silly.

You’ve got the 4 musketeers on twitter sewing fear, begging for the not a bailout bailout all while the rhetoric for student relief is summarized by “ bootstraps, you have em? Personal responsibility, you got it? “

Now they break a bank because they mismatched their maturity dates and risk and they get their bailout not one week later?

Pretty clear who this system serves.

edit:

They are "backstopping" 25B, get this, so far. Jcal is on Twitter spaces right now going over it and there's tons of subtext that people are glossing over.

This is a bailout. Now they're calling it a regulatory failure[1][2].

BTFP, the new TARP. Was TARP a bailout?

Twitter spaces had a bunch of softball questions, not a serious discussion if not to pat himself on the shoulder.

This 25B will be expanded, and we will kick the can down the road like nothing happened. Only this time, inflation is raging and we're adding more of it to the pot.

---

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

[2]: https://theintercept.com/2023/03/11/silicon-valley-bank-used...
I don’t know about clawbacks on bonuses, but part of their comp is equity and shareholders are getting wiped, so you’re pretty much getting your wish anyway.
Was bicycle riding the wrong answer? Should he have said fiddling?
> Why do you say this with such certainty?? I am for efficient government and savings to the taxpayer, so I would absolutely support such a measure if I agreed.

I'm not certain, but my life experience and limited formal training in economics suggests that it's a possibility at least worth considering, and I have a strong positive prior on it for many circumstances.

> Just because the government provides help, it is not given that it will ultimately be positive ROI for the taxpayers. What is the payback period here and when can I expect to see the savings on my tax bill going down? If it takes 50B to make depositors whole, how many jobs will be saved, how long will it take to recoup that from taxing those jobs, and what will the profit in excess of cost be?

This is literally why government agencies like the BLS, Treasury, et alia exist and hire economists and statisticians to address such questions.

Whether or not Congress listens or allows them to do their jobs is another story.

> Reasonable people would agree that 1 billion to save a single job would never pay itself back, so clearly there is a threshold somewhere. No economist would refute that one exists.

Sure, see above.

> People seem to assume or treat it as an axiom that any help the government provides is a net positive investment, independent of cost or analysis.

I don't. You don't. Ignore the people who do.

> The idea that this is known or calculated here is absurd. We don't know what % the deposits will be written down, How many jobs that will cost, or how successful those companies will ever be at generating tax revenue.

The FDIC does. They had a pretty good idea about this on Friday, too, even before they put the bank up for sale.

> I am not strictly opposed to aid in a crisis. It is clear that in some cases government action saves the taxpayer money. For example, a cheap medical treatment might prevent lifelong government disability payments, with tax savings that vastly outweigh the initial cost. That does not mean that every medical treatment at any cost translates to tax savings.

I am proposing that this is one such scenario, where both the costs and benefits are relatively easy to quantify, and that on its face we should expect it to be net positive.

> There are also questions of moral Hazzard and incentives, but I put those secondary. Regulations can and should be fixed, independent of how we respond to this crisis. However, that does not factor into question of if an account holder bailout is a profitable venture for the taxpayer.

This seems backwards to me. Moral hazard and (lack of proper) incentives are the root cause. If you don't like the government needing to step in to help people, then you should consider these your top priority.

> Does this make sense

Yes.

> do you understand where I am coming from?

Not really, sorry.
It is, if you request and get approved.

https://github.com/facebookresearch/llama
The training sources and weights are public info. Less than 5% of the training was from Wikipedia and of that it covers many languages. English Wikipedia article text alone is ~22 GB when losslessly compressed so it's no surprised it's not giving original articles back.

CCNet [67%], C4 [15%], GitHub [4.5%], Wikipedia [4.5%], Books [4.5%], ArXiv [2.5%], Stack Exchange[2%]. The Wikipedia and Books domains include data in the following languages: bg, ca, cs, da, de, en, es, fr, hr, hu, it, nl, pl, pt, ro, ru, sl, sr, sv, uk
So, prefer unicorn semantics?[0]

[0] : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unicon_(programming_language)
It’s not available to banks, only to used-to-be-banks.
None of those people could sell anything (never mind everything) in March without violating law, unless that selling aligned with preexisting 10b5 plans to sell. You can look at the insider action[0] yourself, everything but the Becker sale looks like routine sale / disposition of options/equity comp, and even that isn’t that aberrational compared to his sales in ‘22 and ‘21.

I think you’re right about the proportional sizes, but it looks like the other officers only held a few thousand shares each, so routine grant/sale transactions were a much larger share of their individual holdings.

[0] https://www.nasdaq.com/market-activity/stocks/sivb/insider-a...
Could the blast itself be quite strong and blow debris further outwards into space ?
Are you replying to a different comment?

I didn't say the bank was getting bailed out.

I was observing that ultrarich depositors with billion-dollar uninsured balances who would have lost money due to a reduction in the value of bonds are being made whole by socializing their losses.

While I, someone who is not ultrarich, who is just trying to save for my family, will have to eat 100% of the losses due to a reduction in the value of bonds, and have zero opportunity to have someone else cover my losses.
House prices are up quite a bit in areas that are rapidly building
Your problem is windows
They went around begging for bailouts when they could have just had the companies sell the uninsured deposit claims at a discount, paid their workers, and, as equity, eaten the loss.
> So if the UK invested such that it had 10x the per capita scientists and engineers, let's say 10% of the population vs 1%, then it could compete with a nation of 680 million

With the equal outcome approach taking over universities and sciences being considered the unfashionable stream unlike East Asia, how would you do this?

Even if you are able to, why won't these trained people just leave for US when they realise they are compensated more and taxed less there?
If your employer doesn't pay you, then you find a another job.
pipe stdin.
Sounds like a bit of a hazard: the difference between insolvent or not for many entities is just accounting conventions. Lock in some non-MTM losses-- wham!-- insolvent.

Why should bankruptcy protection be denied to any entity that would be unquestionably qualified if they simply took an additional legitimate action that would make their creditors worse off?
Depending on how full you load your dishwasher, that might require you to take out a dirty dish again to check… which strictly speaking, is a little gross for some unknown reason.
Inflation at this level is fine. Central planners raising interest rates is the problem.

If you want to get money out of the economy, this is the opportunity to tax negative externalities, the very things you want to have less of. But the central planners instead reach for the wrong tool: raising interest rates. They should be flexing their fiscal policy muscle. It should be a tax bonanza on fossil fuels, plastic pollution, overfishing and much much more! You can solve actual environmental issues this way!

Well, when people default on their loans and can't refinance them, they'll default and that money will disappear from the economy. That's on the bank underwriters, and that's when their balance sheets deserve to go lopsided. Not because of central planners raising interest rates.

I far, far prefer a UBI to the Banking System for putting money in people's hands. An underwriter at a bank guesses whether a business will be able to repay a loan with interest over 10 years. A consumer knows whether they want to buy something today with their UBI money. I'd prefer the money enter the system via consumer choices, not underwriters at banks.

People often ask "how can we afford UBI". They don't understand how money is issued and destroyed. The banks currently issue the money with zero reserve requirements, and it's only destroyed when people can't afford to pay the loans. We could equally just ask "how can we afford the banking system?" We can afford either system, it's just a question of who gets the actual money, and I'd rather consumers make that decision. Because then it goes towards things people actually need, as opposed to making fatcats richer.
The average depositor does not feel like someone with over 250k in the bank. No one will save those people if they hit a difficult situation like this.
That said, I personally do not have an opinion on the svb matter, just stating what I feel the sentiment to be.
How many ad campaigns are there consisting of only obese people?

There is still plenty of work for conventionally attractive people in advertising.
Yeah, I mean israel is just pure good. Ignoring the apartheid state, the open air prison, violation of international law, secret hidden nuclear weapons, bombing and attacking foreign nation more consistently then Russia, conducting international spying and information campaigns, influencing election, assassinating foreign scientists, producing false evidence accusing other nations of building nuclear weapons (the irnoy) and that just the first few things that jump to mind.

They are such a great ally, they have done all those great things. Like in the Golf War 1, when they did literally nothing and they were the biggest hindrance to forming a coalition. Or that time where they broke all agreements with the US and made a 2-state solution practically impossible. Or when a war they started led to mass radicalization, that motivated directly motivated the 911 bombers to join AQ. Or when top level Israeli officials literally said they preferred ISIS and certainty wouldn't help much defeating them, bombing the forces who were fighting ISIS.

Israel is such a great ally, they really have earned unending friendship and support. They are not at all like other nations in the middle east.
Financial Fragility (2018) [pdf]
No, they banked there because SVB would throw money at VC's and founders (ski trips, free meals, lines of credit) who in turn would recommend/force their companies to use the bank. For all the talk of being "friendly" and "relationships" thats basically it.

The average american now has to cover the loss, either through eventual taxes, or through passthrough costs from their bank (who will not give them a free meal or ski trip).
It might not be odd or bad if you consider that almost everyone is selfish.

However, the fundamental problem here is that SVB lost $X billion dollars of depositors' money, and Garry et al. wanted the government i.e. taxpayers to pay for those billions instead of the depositors, hurting us for the benefit of him and his community.

This is ordinary human nature and I don't care about Peter Thiel doing that because everyone already knows he's selfish, but some others want to act like they're selfless and be celebrated for it, and I don't accept that hypocrisy. Rich people should be assumed selfish until very strongly proven otherwise.
Are you aware of how your bank's cash and assets are invested?
No don’t talk about the elephant in the room (fractional reserve). That is the sacred dogma.
One thing that you can do that will greatly simplify dishwasher management, is to have two dishwashers.

There is one clean dishwasher and one dirty dishwasher. You take plates from the clean dishwasher, use them, and put them in the dirty dishwasher. Once the clean dishwasher is empty, the dirty dishwasher is run, and then becomes the clean dishwasher, and the empty one now becomes the dirty dishwasher.

There are analogous situations in system design as well.
They did pass tax on buybacks

Carried interest needs to be next