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

Discord bans r/WallStreetBets server, subreddit went private for a while

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 1001 posts

Re: Discord bans r/WallStreetBets server, subreddit went private for a while

#311

Post by BingoAhoy »

whatshisface wrote: post #246
fennecfoxen wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Comments like these really drive home how much a deranged cult phenomenon this whole thing is, more so than any headlines.

Well, if you interpret radicalized to mean "have seen a real-world example of the benefits of federated social networks, perhaps real enough to shake the notoriously tech-apathetic public into doing something as easy as making an account somewhere else," then maybe it's a useful insight... unless, of course, nobody does anything.

Nobody does anything for awhile is the most likely result. But there's also a side effect of generating angst and resentment towards the establishment that'll get bottled up and pressurized waiting for the right opportunity to explosively release. An investment in radicalization so to speak. I think Trump is an example of that phenomenon.

Re: Discord bans r/WallStreetBets server, subreddit went private for a while

#313

Post by hinkley »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #191
ashtonkem wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Risk of SEC involvement. This admin is probably nowhere near as lenient on this kind of stuff as the last was, and the recent nonsense with GameStop is probably bad enough to attract negative regulatory attention.

That’s the joke. The SEC pursues the mostly harmless while letting the sharks go free. Did they do anything about naked short selling of Overstock stock? Nope, and now that it’s happened again and retail took advantage of a bad trade, the rules suddenly change “to protect the little guy.” It’s disingenuous at a minimum, and crony capitalism when taken to the maximum. Are they doing anything about Nancy Pelosi (her hu…

I bought TSLA around about the same time she must have, with no insider knowledge.

Honestly I think we need some new rules about securities and elected officials, but the obvious ones would not cover a sitting president patronizing his own failing businesses in order to increase revenues using taxpayer money.

We want rules against people buying stock or taking bribes from oil companies, but nothing about using your own company to 'provide services' to federal officials. But even if you transfer control of your holdings to a third party, you still know what was in there when you started. And if 'what was in there' was your nephew's business...

Re: Discord bans r/WallStreetBets server, subreddit went private for a while

#314

Post by ve55 »

root_axis wrote: post #152
ve55 wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When you're able to play a video game and have a large amount of users agree to use anything besides Discord, then I'll grant this objection. Until then, I'll refer to it as a monopoly (not over all communication of course, just within its own niche).

All the voice chat options that existed in the gaming world prior to Discord's dominance still exist, except with those options you have to pay for your own hosting like every gaming clan used to do prior to Discord. This is the cost of "free". It doesn't help that Discord has the best chat client on the market, so the competitors need to step it up.

It's a good point worth making: that Discord only exists and is as usable and popular as it is because it has a profit model and significant funding, and that's definitely a large component of why FOSS has lost users to them.

Still, as long as things like Wikipedia and the Internet Archive and Signal and perhaps even Firefox exist, I'll believe we can do better.

Re: Discord bans r/WallStreetBets server, subreddit went private for a while

#315

Post by eli_gottlieb »

necubi wrote: post #78
sillysaurusx wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Someone went from 50k to 50M by igniting a short squeeze. All eyes were on the WSB subreddit, and discord server. Now both are private or offline. No one has any chance to coordinate now. Discord’s action is effectively market manipulation in a literal sense, because this is certainly going to affect the market. I’m curious why the sub went private though. EDIT: I regret my phrasing. I didn’t mean this was illegal ma…

Market manipulation is not anything that "affects the market." That definition would cover pretty much any and all behavior. In this case Discord is not trading securities, is not telling any one else to trade securities, has nothing at all to do with securities. If I run an email service and find that a user is running a pump-and-dump scam through it, do you really think I shouldn't be able to shut down their accoun…

>If I run an email service and find that a user is running a pump-and-dump scam through it, do you really think I shouldn't be able to shut down their account?

Yeah, I kinda think the SEC should be in charge of whether you're doing a pump-and-dump or not.

Re: Discord bans r/WallStreetBets server, subreddit went private for a while

#316

Post by ThomPete »

fennecfoxen wrote: post #243
kgin wrote: post #17

I have no doubt the timing was extremely intentional.

The timing was more or less "hey this pump and dump scam on our platform is getting a bunch of negative attention." People seem to think they were paid off by some big players. Ha! In their dreams.

There is no pump and dump scheme that haven't been allowed by the hedge funds for decades.

Re: Discord bans r/WallStreetBets server, subreddit went private for a while

#317

Post by bostonsre »

chrisweekly wrote: post #282
mrtksn wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

See, the problem is that people are doing all this because they believe that it doesn’t matter. These are not idealists or indoctrinated revolutionaries. No one is going to do anything if it’s not going to bring lulz or cash quickly because nothing matters anyway. All the anti establishment movement is nihilistic in its core. These are not Eastern European kids who dream to finish school and go to Western Europe and…

You might have some points to make but you lost me at "All the anti establishment movement is nihilistic in its core." Sweeping generalities like this are anathema to discourse.

Idk, it kind of sounds plausible to me. I don't see the Wallstreet bets sub reddit starting a revolution, protests or suddenly running for office to enact change. Do you?

Re: Discord bans r/WallStreetBets server, subreddit went private for a while

#318

Post by bostonsre »

mech422 wrote: post #291
SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does it prove that? I tend to agree that it's true, but I don't see what it has to do with the current situation. If anything, I expect most people to argue the opposite - when the price drops again, and some retail traders lose their shirts, there will inevitably be a flood of thinkpieces about how cruel the financial system is for permitting them to lose money on the same terms as a hedge fund.

I tend to think people's losses will be smaller (as individuals) then everyone seems to think. This is reddit we're talking about, and people using RobinHood. I'm guessing losses for those that didn't get out will be limited to beer money. I think the reason they could squeeze the shorts is because of the size of their army, not the depth of their war chest... After all, its all about the lulz...

I'm more worried about the retail investors that jumped on the bandwagon too late with their life savings. The ones that got in at the start will be fine or better than fine.
Post reply on HN