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

Robinhood now has a 1-Star rating on the Google Play Store

play.google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

441–450 of 547 posts

Re: Robinhood now has a 1-Star rating on the Google Play Store

#441

Post by landryraccoon »

vga805 wrote: post #410
silexia wrote: post #378

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This will probably be my least popular post ever, but the explanation needs to get out there for why Robinhood stopped trading on GME. Selling a stock short is NOT illegal. It is a perfectly valid type of investment according to the SEC: “D. Are short sales legal? Although the vast majority of short sales are legal, abusive short sale practices are illegal. For example, it is prohibited for any person to engage in a…

Wrong. The bull case was made for GME as far back as late 2019, and it gained momentum this year. Nothing different than Jim Cramer talking up a stock on CNBC every fucking night. Edit: I know this because I watched a youtube video from a popular redditor named deepfuckingvalue a few weeks ago and bought into the thesis fully as a value investment. He goes under the name RoaringKitty on youtube. I lost multiple years…

I'm curious how you would justify the valuation.

GME is trading at between 4x and 8x it's all time high in 2008. The graph of the stock price basically looks like a flat line until a few days ago where it dramatically spiked to far, far more than it's previous peak.

Are you saying that GME will actually be worth it's current stock price a year from now? Why is that?

Re: Robinhood now has a 1-Star rating on the Google Play Store

#442

Post by krapp »

ttt0 wrote: post #283
krapp wrote: post #271

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A slippery slope argument assumes the maximum degenerate outcome of sliding down the slope as a certainty, that no one will be able to correct for, mitigate or reverse the slide when it starts. That's what makes it a fallacy - it's a thought terminating cliche meant to eliminate the possibility of nuance, as any middle ground is implicitly part of the slope. Otherwise, it's just an argument that risk exists, which is…

Slippery slope is a valid political tactic for those outside the Overton window.

It's effective, because markets (including the marketplace of ideas) are irrational and bad faith tactics are often more effective at influencing people (at least in the short term) than reason and verifiable fact. I wouldn't consider it valid, though.

Re: Robinhood now has a 1-Star rating on the Google Play Store

#443

Post by yuliyp »

recursive wrote: post #149
yuliyp wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A rating is not a thing that an app deserves. It's a datapoint published by an app store to help its users make decisions about which apps to use.

The one thing does not exclude the other.

Google doesn't care whether Robinhood succeeds or not. It cares whether people trust the Play Store ratings (and more broadly, trust the Play Store itself). They'll do what's needed to achieve their goals, not Robinhood.

Re: Robinhood now has a 1-Star rating on the Google Play Store

#445

Post by subsubzero »

alangibson wrote: post #80

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…

I agree, instead of the original idea of the internet being a utopia of free speech, decentralization and free trade, it has devolved into a place where a select few oligarchies reign supreme pushing their views and actions onto the billions of users forced into their monopolies. Laws do not apply to them and even when they break their own TOS there are no repercussions.

A strong digital rights for users is a good start, but I think the end goal is that they(the tech monopolies) are essential utilities for a majority of the world and should be regulated as such. A CEO should not be able to silence a democratically elected leader from a communications platform(congress or a govt. communications committee should decide), users should be able to buy the stock of their choosing(the SEC can decide to halt trading pending illegal behavior) and not have that right removed by a companies CEO.

Re: Robinhood now has a 1-Star rating on the Google Play Store

#446

Post by michaelsbradley »

root_axis wrote: post #395
michaelsbradley wrote: post #371

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, DeFi will simply migrate to L2 solutions as they become viable.

Yeah, funny how the solution to all the inherent problems with blockchains is to move off the blockchain. The future of "DeFi" is centralization.

A viable L2 is one that is properly decentralized, though its consensus mechanism need not replicate the mechanism of L1.

Re: Robinhood now has a 1-Star rating on the Google Play Store

#448

Post by Bud »

8ytecoder wrote: post #279
worker767424 wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Especially in states like California. My rich friends can and continue to travel. My friends in the service sector are at home collecting a meager unemployment. It doesn’t jibe well with the ethos CA proudly proclaims. They shutdown outdoor dining and even playgrounds while Costco, Amazon warehouses and Best Buy can be packed. We also know and have data that masks work but salons were closed. (A case in Texas comes t…

No, we don't have data that masks are protective in a salon situation where people are in close contact for a long time. I wouldn't trust the masks that most people are using (surgical masks with half-inch gaps on either side and quarter-inch gaps around the nose, or single-layer cloth masks) to protect me in that scenario.

Re: Robinhood now has a 1-Star rating on the Google Play Store

#449

Post by burgerquizz »

dang wrote: post #402
colejohnson66 wrote: post #340

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What exactly is the issue? (if you can share)

HN's application server runs on a single core. https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor...

How many simultaneous visitors can HN handle with that single core?

Re: Robinhood now has a 1-Star rating on the Google Play Store

#450

Post by defen »

silexia wrote: post #378
shrimpx wrote: post #345

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have a bit of knowledge from friends who work in fintech, and the sentiment among fintech companies seems to be that SEC doesn't matter. The fine is small and comes way too late. You can simply account for an approximate future fine and move forward with your shady business.

This will probably be my least popular post ever, but the explanation needs to get out there for why Robinhood stopped trading on GME. Selling a stock short is NOT illegal. It is a perfectly valid type of investment according to the SEC: “D. Are short sales legal? Although the vast majority of short sales are legal, abusive short sale practices are illegal. For example, it is prohibited for any person to engage in a…

> For example, picture a retail investor with a Robinhood account had sold call options in the amount of $100,000 and their account was worth $200,000. If the price gapped from 300 to 5000 and those options were exercised, that trader could have a loss of $10,000,000. He would lose the value of his account, $200,000… but the brokerage would have to make up the rest of the settlement and take a loss of $9,800,000. Now multiply that by thousands of accounts…. no brokerage wants to take the risk of being bankrupted, so they shut it down.

That's why every brokerage has a risk department. If you're a brokerage and you let thousands of customers write uncovered GME calls, you deserve to lose all your money and go out of business. Simple as that.

Post reply on HN