Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Show HN: Can’t afford Bloomberg Terminal? No prob, I built the next best thing

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 314 posts

Re: Show HN: Can’t afford Bloomberg Terminal? No prob, I built the next best thing

#201

Post by Cu3PO42 »

hdra wrote: post #119
nt2h9uh238h wrote: post #112

Check out AlleAktien Quantitativ (attn: it's German but it's 100% free) and they'll translate it to other languages, soon: https://www.alleaktien.de/quantitativ/

that looks interesting. it certainly has many of the stuff that I'm looking for. Do you know how "soon" are they gonna be translating it into other languages? and if you happen to know German, is there any mention of where are they getting their data?

As far as I can tell they make no mention of where exactly they are getting their data, but they claim to update multiple times daily and review all data manually.

They also say the following:

> Uns blieb bei der Aktienanalyse oft keine andere Wahl, als unzählige Geschäftsberichte der vergangenen 20 Jahre zu öffnen und dort die gesuchten Daten manuell und mühsam viele Stunden herauszusuchen.

The essence of which is that in the past they often manually extracted data from the last twenty years of annual reports from a given company. Maybe that's still how they're doing it.

Re: Show HN: Can’t afford Bloomberg Terminal? No prob, I built the next best thing

#203

Post by scaladev »

lallysingh wrote: post #190
cambalache wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He just wanted to push his service. HN comment section has been unbearable recently with the substantial increase of people doing this. It has always been present but now it is almost reaching the point of making the comment section worthless.

Pushing your own product has been standard and encouraged practice at HN since the beginning. This is an incubator site!

Even if you are posting a fake review as a third person?

Re: Show HN: Can’t afford Bloomberg Terminal? No prob, I built the next best thing

#204

Post by Hnrobert42 »

cambalache wrote: post #73
sevencolors wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

According to the docs it uses https://www.alphavantage.co/

He just wanted to push his service. HN comment section has been unbearable recently with the substantial increase of people doing this. It has always been present but now it is almost reaching the point of making the comment section worthless.

Who just wanted to push this service? OP or sevencolors?

Either way, as a counterweight to all the conspiracy theory nonsense on the web, I have been making an effort to not assume I know people’s hidden intentions. I’d like to invite you to join me in that.

Re: Show HN: Can’t afford Bloomberg Terminal? No prob, I built the next best thing

#205

Post by yakshaving_jgt »

ananthrk wrote: post #82
valuearb wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

if it doesn't come with an ISDA, I'm not interested. "JP Morgan Employee : But, uh... you guys are under the capital requirements for an ISDA. Charlie Geller : By how much? JP Morgan Employee : [thinking] Uh... how much? One billion, four hundred seventy million. So... a lot. Charlie Geller : This makes us look bad, doesn't it? That we didn't know what the capital requirements were? JP Morgan Employee : Uh... it's no…

Can you provide some more context on this?

It's the best scene in the movie. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qo1OSqBQYmk

Re: Show HN: Can’t afford Bloomberg Terminal? No prob, I built the next best thing

#206

Post by Hnrobert42 »

Is it just me, or is the feel of the comment on this post different than other HN posts? There are a lot more snarky jokes. A little more combative. It feels like why I stopped reading Reddit. I hope it doesn’t metastasize to posts on other topics.

Re: Show HN: Can’t afford Bloomberg Terminal? No prob, I built the next best thing

#207

Post by zorkavatar »

Hnrobert42 wrote: post #206

Is it just me, or is the feel of the comment on this post different than other HN posts? There are a lot more snarky jokes. A little more combative. It feels like why I stopped reading Reddit. I hope it doesn’t metastasize to posts on other topics.

Welcome to the wonderful world of "Show HN"

Re: Show HN: Can’t afford Bloomberg Terminal? No prob, I built the next best thing

#208

Post by baxtr »

Hnrobert42 wrote: post #206

Is it just me, or is the feel of the comment on this post different than other HN posts? There are a lot more snarky jokes. A little more combative. It feels like why I stopped reading Reddit. I hope it doesn’t metastasize to posts on other topics.

Maybe these are /r/wallstreetbets folks flocking in?

On a more serious note: I think the topic of stocks and getting rich real quick might generate that kind of feel, on any platform. Probably borderline for HN to have these discussions?

Re: Show HN: Can’t afford Bloomberg Terminal? No prob, I built the next best thing

#209

Post by eek04_ »

moonchild wrote: post #14
maximente wrote: post #13

this is nice - it looks like it's linked against at least one GPL lib (fuzzywuzzy) though, so the MIT license almost certainly isn't allowed. looks like there's only one usage though, the other is an unused import, so may be easy to change

The MIT license is ‘allowed’. The code in itself is MIT licensed. It's just that, when compiled and linked against fuzzywuzzy, the aggregate work that results must be GPLed.

It's not clear that the aggregate work is allowed to be distributed under the GPL. My legal hypothesis (from having worked with BSD licensed code and noticed how much hassle having many licenses is) is that the extra requirement of repeating the MIT license could be challenged against the "extra restrictions" clause of the GPL. Think of the case of having 500 variant MIT/BSD3-clause/et licenses that CLAIM to mean the same thing and need full reproduction; the cost of having lawyers verify this is substantial, so it is an actual substantial restriction.

GNU believes that the lax licenses (MIT, advertising clause free BSD) are "compatible with GPL" because the GPL requires attribution and the licenses can be considered a form of attribution.

The actual status of this has, to the best of my knowledge, not been tested in court. Because this is a claim from the group that wants to add restrictions (the GPL side) and they generally want to be able to take BSD code and apply extra restrictions to it, it's not clear it's a large risk in practice.

Post reply on HN