231–240 of 547 posts
I think it is ridiculous that Robinhood took the matters in their own hands to halt trading on GME. If anyone had to do this was the SEC. It is just outrageous.
The Parler incident sent a message across the tech industry that this kind of behavior is acceptable. Whether you liked Parler or not, the lynching of Parler was ultimately a loss for everyone for the precedent that it set.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The sells were appropriate if bought on margin (once the share price took a dive). The thing is, RobinHood refused “buy” order that were completely inline with the margin requirements, and that caused the share price to dive. Seems to be a coordinated move among all retail browsers (including IB according to people on this discussion - despite publicly claiming they are just hiking margins). Basically, as of this mor…
> RobinHood refused “buy” order that were completely inline with the margin requirements, and that caused the share price to dive. This is just a conspiracy theory. It doesn't even make sense. If GME was objectively such a good bet, you really think that those institutional investors out there were simply ignoring it? That Robinhood's users alone were the sole reason for the speculative spike in this stock? This is a…
What I’m saying is that you are provably wrong.
Serious question: Since RobinHood is a private company, does the "if you don't like it, you can build your own platform" argument apply here? Or does that only apply selectively when it benefits partisan politics? This is the natural evolution when censorship as we've recently seen is given a pass.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The sells were appropriate if bought on margin (once the share price took a dive). The thing is, RobinHood refused “buy” order that were completely inline with the margin requirements, and that caused the share price to dive. Seems to be a coordinated move among all retail browsers (including IB according to people on this discussion - despite publicly claiming they are just hiking margins). Basically, as of this mor…
> RobinHood refused “buy” order that were completely inline with the margin requirements, and that caused the share price to dive. This is just a conspiracy theory. It doesn't even make sense. If GME was objectively such a good bet, you really think that those institutional investors out there were simply ignoring it? That Robinhood's users alone were the sole reason for the speculative spike in this stock? This is a…
The stock market has a long reputation of saying "Well, sucks to be you" when various scams are committed - even when a hedge fund manager burns through a bunch of retirement funds and then shows up at the company demanding their annual retainer so I am quite reluctant to buy that this one instance is when altruism is coming in to play.
A bunch of people are choosing to loose a bit of their money in exchange for warm fuzzy feelings - I think it's absolutely idiotic but then again I don't tend to patronize casinos either. If there is someone behind this running a pump & dump scam they absolutely should be prosecuted as normal, but falling victim to a financial scam on the stock market is one of those properties capitalist libertarians always hold up and they can't change their mind just because this one instance ended up screwing them over instead.
One of the good things I see coming out of Robinhood blocking trading, Twitter and Reddit booting problematic users, Parler getting vaporized, etc. is a sudden realization amongst people of just how easily major parts of their lives can be instantly turned off by intermediaries. My hope is that this will drive a reformist movement around digital rights (speech, commerce, etc.) As well as a movement from platforms to…
Throwing this out there, too: assorted government restrictions and lockdowns imposed by regional public health officials. The early ones were more justified because we knew less, but as the pandemic drug on, the burden of proof justifying closures needed to increase, and legislators needed to step up and legitimize the policies. It's like how the president can wage war for 90 days, but then has to get approval from c…
If everyone in the U.S. would buy only one share of GME, that would probably be enough to screw a few billionaires.
Citadel reloaded shorts before RH cut off gme and the rest https://twitter.com/justinkan/status/1354853920762253315?s=2...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Every time I mention this on Hacker News, I get downvoted by the neoliberal fascists that want to suppress the speech they feel comfortable with silencing. Free speech is only free if we allow all of it. Americans have thick skin. It's in our culture. We've accomplished so much in spite of internal disagreement and oppression: voting rights, women's rights, gay marriage (which still isn't enshrined in the constitutio…
> Americans have thick skin. It's in our culture. This really doesn't track historically. Lots of voices have been historically silenced by American majorities because of hurt feelings or "decency." It's also worth noting that America hasn't been uniformly ahead of the curve in terms of granting rights to those that were originally denied. Probably the worst example is getting rid of slavery, which was far more blood…
One of the good things I see coming out of Robinhood blocking trading, Twitter and Reddit booting problematic users, Parler getting vaporized, etc. is a sudden realization amongst people of just how easily major parts of their lives can be instantly turned off by intermediaries. My hope is that this will drive a reformist movement around digital rights (speech, commerce, etc.) As well as a movement from platforms to…
Maybe make Protecting free speech part our governments highest law. Maybe we could amend the law. Seriously. Lots of people love to dump on the constitution as old and not relevant. But it’s meant to restrict government and protect people’s freedom.
Right now you have the right to associate or disassociate with whomever you like (protected classes aside). In your altered future, the government forces churches to allow atheists and rival religions to be allowed to speak at the church, despite the desires of the owners and congregation. It would effectively be compelled association.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is a pet peeve of mine about star ratings. Visually, allowing 1 to 5 stars inflates the way ratings look, because the first star is always present, even for the worst products. Imagine if it was pie chart or a bar chart: the lowest rating would look like 20%, not 0%. Or imagine a product where 50% of people gave it the lowest rating (1 star) and the rest gave it the highest rating (5 stars). This would be presen…
Yeah but if I see 0 stars the result is that I'm assuming that there were no votes.