Robinhood now has a 1-Star rating on the Google Play Store • Hacker News Board

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

#481

Post by ALittleLight » Thu, Jan 28, 2021, 11:13 PM UTC

silexia wrote: post #425

vga805 wrote: post #410

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 am sorry to hear about your losses, but that does not disprove my explanation. I also am a member of WSB and read all the top posts. I think most of them make the argument to hold the position as a short squeeze is coming, and very few of them argue the stock is truly worth a ton of money. Very few people actually believe a company that sells video games the same way Blockbuster sold movies has a lot of potential.

That absolutely disproves your explanation. You said nobody was making a case for GameStop being a good stock, and the other comment pointed out that the single most popular name associated with this trade has been doing exactly that.

You also quoted the SEC saying that manipulating a stock price to cause a short squeeze is illegal but also that short squeezes occur naturally. Expecting a short squeeze and intending to profit off of it is not illegal.

You make the point that some people on wallstreetbets made comments that crossed the line on manipulation. I'm sure that's true, but if you see a few problematic comments out of millions it's obviously absurd to say that a stock mustn't be bought because of them.

Ironically, you are criticizing what is clearly not manipulation (valuing GME highly and expecting to profit off of a coming short squeeze) in order to defend what clearly is manipulation (banning a million retail investors from taking one side of a trade at a critical moment).

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

#482

Post by aeze » Thu, Jan 28, 2021, 11:14 PM UTC

silexia wrote: post #425

vga805 wrote: post #410

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 am sorry to hear about your losses, but that does not disprove my explanation. I also am a member of WSB and read all the top posts. I think most of them make the argument to hold the position as a short squeeze is coming, and very few of them argue the stock is truly worth a ton of money. Very few people actually believe a company that sells video games the same way Blockbuster sold movies has a lot of potential.

I'm not a member of WSB, and I don't follow their forum. Having done an independent analysis and deciding that it is potentially a good (but risky) move for me, why am I not allowed to trade GME? I can trade any other stock this way.

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

#483

Post by xxpor » Thu, Jan 28, 2021, 11:15 PM UTC

bagacrap wrote: post #422

xxpor wrote: post #368

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't have a problem with this specific case , I'm thinking of, for example, users of 2 different apps having a war with each other and going in and leaving negative reviews for the other app.

well since that's a totally different scenario it's weird that you bring it up in this thread.

It's relevant that this exposed the "vulnerability", if you want to call it that. Now everyone has a new tool to be obnoxious with.

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

#484

Post by snowwrestler » Thu, Jan 28, 2021, 11:16 PM UTC

BLKNSLVR wrote: post #412

root_axis wrote: post #362

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's like saying virginity is a fetish. Atheism is not a religion, it's a lack of belief in a supernatural deity.

It's belief in the lack of a supernatural deity. Subtle difference, as required by the topic.

True and it points out that the U.S. government position is actually agnosticism, i.e. it does not take a position one way or another on supernatural deities or other religious concepts.

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

#485

Post by ALittleLight » Thu, Jan 28, 2021, 11:17 PM UTC

silexia wrote: post #439

thestu wrote: post #428

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Assuming this is all true, it still just feels like they're picking winners, which is probably the thing that's going to matter more than anything else going forward. People can and will point to a laundry list of rules violations by institutional investors (is a 140% short of a stock completely and unambiguously within the rules?) that show the hypocrisy of the little guy getting screwed.

They aren't picking winners, they are avoiding lawsuits for allowing illegal activity on their platform. Short squeezes are illegal. You can see people collaborating all over WSB to create short squeezes, most frequently using the Robinhood app. https://www.reddit.com/r/wallstreetbets/comments/l594yg/gme_...

You keep repeating that short squeezes are illegal but that's not true. Manipulating prices to cause a short squeeze is illegal, but that's not what happened here. Some people bought GME because they liked the stock. Others bought because they thought a short squeeze was coming.

If I think the price is going up and buy, that's legal. If I manipulate the price to go up after I buy, that's illegal. It's the same thing.

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

#486

Post by thephyber » Thu, Jan 28, 2021, 11:17 PM UTC

stormcode wrote: post #471

valuearb wrote: post #403

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Bill of Rights doesn’t enumerate rights for Americans, it enumerates them for everyone (outside of specific voting rights). And those rights are only to protect you from government actions because it’s the ultimate monopoly. The first amendment does not give you the right to enter someone else’s house to spread your political opinions, just as the second doesn’t give you the right to walk in to their home with yo…

Yes, to a point, the 'internet is free'. But you are sort of twisting the point a bit I think. Not only does it cost money to have a website in many cases, but to be close to 'free' in terms of what you can post the theoretical person you are referring to needs to run their own web server, and their own DNS server, and hopefully they don't expect to need a domain name... Otherwise, it is not in fact free. Registrars…

You seem to be working towards the core issue (eg. town square versus multiple substitute vendors) but you missed it while talking about cost and irrelevant details (eg. A website can be hosted without a DNS record).

As I see it, the core issue is that with enough substitutes denying business to a person/organization, the customer can effectively be denied access to “the town square”.

In the relevant case law, the “town square” is only applied when there was only a single meeting space in the town. In that case, it was a private mall. Twitter doesn’t apply as a town square on the internet because there are plenty other places to communicate on the internet, even if it is not as convenient or wide reaching. The problem lies in the case where all substitutes for a town square all block you.

The solution historically was to insist on a common carrier designation for certain utilities.

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

#487

Post by ardy42 » Thu, Jan 28, 2021, 11:17 PM UTC

It looks like it's ~2.75 stars now.

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

#488

Post by zarkov99 » Thu, Jan 28, 2021, 11:18 PM UTC

AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote: post #475

zarkov99 wrote: post #462

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am all for the free market, but when companies grow too dominant it no longer works, and we should not pretend otherwise. Just look at what happened to Parler.

These companies hardly have a monopoly on internet communication, case in point: Parler is still around!

One of us is misinformed . Parler is not around as a working social media website as of a few minutes ago.

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

#489

Post by inopinatus » Thu, Jan 28, 2021, 11:18 PM UTC

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…

Alternative take; the following are not major parts of your life:

> Robinhood, Parler, Twitter, Reddit (et cetera)

but represent trivial ephemera whose significance for the individual, following abandonment/deletion, vanishes into hindsight once the endowment effect and separation anxiety wears off.

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

#490

Post by valuearb » Thu, Jan 28, 2021, 11:22 PM UTC

StillBored wrote: post #426

valuearb wrote: post #406

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No one is restricting anyone’s speech or searching their house. Sorry that you can’t force other people to host your thoughts tho, sounds so frustrating.

Really, where do you live? Because where I live the government via corporations is scraping up "metadata" which includes people's web cams feeds, phone records, etc. AKA searching their house. And if you haven't been paying attention, as despicable as the speech is, political "speech" is being suppressed by large tech and media companies, and to a lesser extent what people actually say in public spaces, be that the l…

The key point is that “government” is doing something you find despicable. Whether corporations cooperate is by far the lesser concern.

There is a reason Us corporations can’t disclose electronic search warrants to their owners, or why no one kicked Trump off their platform despite incessant rule violations until he was days from leaving, it’s called raw political power.