$70M in 60 Seconds: How Insider Info Helped Someone 28x Their Money • Hacker News Board

Re: $70M in 60 Seconds: How Insider Info Helped Someone 28x Their Money

#351

Post by klipt » Sat, Apr 12, 2025, 3:25 PM UTC

tmcb wrote: post #347

mistrial9 wrote: post #343

Earlier quoted context omitted.

this is called Identity Politics.. basing your judgement of other adults by their demographic classifications.. Replacing skills-based and merit-based promotion with "balancing" is racist and sexist in a polar opposite way from the historical trajectory. This parent statement is part of the unrepentant position of many in the USA. This position lost at multiple levels in a massive open election in the USA.

It is actually the opposite. I assume there is no inherent reason why people from other demographics with the required skills and merit cannot be found. Otherwise, there must be a reason why they can’t, and people who think that the current imbalance is perfectly good must have a pretty reasonable explanation to that. Do you have any?

So will the government mandate that 50% of stay at home parents be men?

Because as the other poster pointed out, if you push men out of the workplace and out of family life (by favoring custody for women) you just end up with a bunch of unemployed idle men, which is a recipe for revolution.

And if 50/50 is the goal, where is the government push for more men in places where they're underrepresented, like university students, nurses, teachers?

Re: $70M in 60 Seconds: How Insider Info Helped Someone 28x Their Money

#352

Post by nabla9 » Sat, Apr 12, 2025, 3:25 PM UTC

DavidPiper wrote: post #203

nabla9 wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The reality is more nuanced. Take China for example. People do criticize the government online all the time. It's just that criticism magically disappears before it reaches critical mass. Generally China does not throw people (Han Chinese, minorities are different) into gulag for posting against the government. They are just constantly censoring and shaping the discussion. Only after they can't contain something they…

Genuinely curious: what do you see as the distinction between an illiberal democracy and a fascist dictatorship? And if there is a significant difference, what stops one becoming the other?

I refer to what political scientists write about the subject.

Illiberal democracy (aka electoral authoritarianism, competitive authoritarianism, or soft authoritarianism) is a system with democratic institutions that don't work properly. Opposition can still win but it's not a fair game.

>And if there is a significant difference, what stops one becoming the other?

People. For example, Ukraine was illiberal democracy and Orange Revolution 2004 changed that. Poland was slipping badly but 2023 Polish protests changed things.

Putin started with illiberal democracy and slipped into pure authoritarian eventually, because Russians can't get their shit together.

Re: $70M in 60 Seconds: How Insider Info Helped Someone 28x Their Money

#353

Post by LeafItAlone » Sat, Apr 12, 2025, 3:34 PM UTC

rvz wrote: post #280

LeafItAlone wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>So how did Pelosi know that that would cause the stock to drop and the DOJ was going to file it? The lawsuit wasn't public months ago and it is related to none other than the government which she has access to. >Then she traded with that information with no downside risk which she benefited from. >If that is not an insider trading loophole, I don't know what is. Yes, if you start with the conclusion (that she traded…

> If you instead ask why they might have traded Visa at the time they did, you will see that there were many valid reasons that they (and many, many others) decided it was a good time to sell. All said in hindsight today, but never for those who benefitted from the insider information. Investors will always buy the stock after it plummets, whilst those who didn't sell had to wait or buy lower to break even. This does…

>This does not excuse the fact that the Pelosis' benefitted from insider (political) information and traded on that, like this blatant example.

You, nor others, have not actually proven that.

>Defending politicians trading on insider info (political or economic) isn't the hill one should die on.

Right, and that’s not what I’m doing. I think politicians in top levels of government should be banned from trading their own stocks (and family, etc.). (Though admittedly I don’t know exactly what that looks like) They should be serving the people, not themselves.

But if I tell you sandwiches should be banned because they are bad for you and I bring you a bowl of pasta as an example of their harmful ways, I’m going to look silly, aren’t I?

Re: $70M in 60 Seconds: How Insider Info Helped Someone 28x Their Money

#354

Post by netsharc » Sat, Apr 12, 2025, 3:36 PM UTC

afpx wrote: post #348

netsharc wrote: post #329

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do admit the existence of insanely moronic arguments that are sometimes made. "As a woman you have to vote for Hillary because she's a woman.". What a dumb argument, that's still identity politics. If the choice was between someone like female Sarah Palin that wants government control of women's bodies, because she thinks the Bible should trump the constitution vs. a man who would respect the separation of church a…

The power is right there, ready to be taken. Contrary to popular belief, you don’t have to wait for the “white man” to grant you more power. But, to do so, you will need to risk more than your online reputation.

Huh, let's just forget that women had to e.g. fight for the right to vote, or the whole civil rights movement... OK, fine, it's 2025, and let's see, is the discrimination that's in people's heads about "what's normal" totally gone? I can admit that if you ask me to imagine a CEO, I'd imagine a middle-aged white man, am I the only one? And what does this image of normality do to the idea of who will be picked for a particular job, by a group of people?

Yeah if I'm looking for a caretaker for my child, a male candidate would also make me go "Huh, interesting". Women have the advantage for this job, and men have it for the CEO job, I wonder which job is more powerful in the world (if we don't pull out a philosophical idea of "powerful"...).

Re: $70M in 60 Seconds: How Insider Info Helped Someone 28x Their Money

#355

Post by klipt » Sat, Apr 12, 2025, 3:37 PM UTC

afpx wrote: post #327

netsharc wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Trump and meritocracy? You are insane. Oh, Hegseth the wife-(and alcohol-)abusing TV-presenter should be in charge the world's most powerful military? Brett Kavanaugh, who in the balance of probability did assault that woman, should be forced into the supreme court (even blocking the FBI investigation)? You're just going to excuse these flaws away, aren't you? To be honest, this thread has shown what weak fragile ego…

My wife likes to tell me that she'll know when feminism has succeeded when the US Supreme Court is all women. I tell her that I'll know when feminism has succeeded when the military is all women.

> feminism has succeeded when the military is all women.

*when the draft is all women, but men are allowed to serve voluntarily

Re: $70M in 60 Seconds: How Insider Info Helped Someone 28x Their Money

#356

Post by tmcb » Sat, Apr 12, 2025, 3:39 PM UTC

klipt wrote: post #351

tmcb wrote: post #347

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is actually the opposite. I assume there is no inherent reason why people from other demographics with the required skills and merit cannot be found. Otherwise, there must be a reason why they can’t, and people who think that the current imbalance is perfectly good must have a pretty reasonable explanation to that. Do you have any?

So will the government mandate that 50% of stay at home parents be men? Because as the other poster pointed out, if you push men out of the workplace and out of family life (by favoring custody for women) you just end up with a bunch of unemployed idle men, which is a recipe for revolution. And if 50/50 is the goal, where is the government push for more men in places where they're underrepresented, like university st…

> So will the government mandate that 50% of stay at home parents be men?

Well, obviously not. But there is always the caveat that suggesting government providing adequate child care to working women is communism of whatever. Is it feasible to have some compromise here?

> And if 50/50 is the goal, where is the government push for more men in places where they're underrepresented, like university students, nurses, teachers?

This sounds like a perfectly legitimate ask if young men do really care about it. Why not contact your local representative and explain the issue in an articulate manner?

Re: $70M in 60 Seconds: How Insider Info Helped Someone 28x Their Money

#357

Post by dullcrisp » Sat, Apr 12, 2025, 3:43 PM UTC

more_corn wrote: post #339

bruce511 wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree, at this point. There is of course voter agency in 2 years. Of course lots of voters (specifically the ones that voted for this) are pretty happy with the way things are going. So any kind of blowback is uncertain at best. If the population were genuinely interested in removing Trump, they could elect 60 democrats to the senate and a house majority, then impeach. But again, a healthy chunk are happy, and a lo…

You assume there will be free and fair elections in the future. I’m not convinced we can depend on that.

We shouldn’t depend on anything. Holding elections is our responsibility.

Re: $70M in 60 Seconds: How Insider Info Helped Someone 28x Their Money

#358

Post by klipt » Sat, Apr 12, 2025, 3:55 PM UTC

tmcb wrote: post #356

klipt wrote: post #351

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So will the government mandate that 50% of stay at home parents be men? Because as the other poster pointed out, if you push men out of the workplace and out of family life (by favoring custody for women) you just end up with a bunch of unemployed idle men, which is a recipe for revolution. And if 50/50 is the goal, where is the government push for more men in places where they're underrepresented, like university st…

> So will the government mandate that 50% of stay at home parents be men? Well, obviously not. But there is always the caveat that suggesting government providing adequate child care to working women is communism of whatever. Is it feasible to have some compromise here? > And if 50/50 is the goal, where is the government push for more men in places where they're underrepresented, like university students, nurses, tea…

> government providing adequate child care to working women

You see this is the bias on the left, that everything must be framed as "for women". If the childcare is only for "working women", will a single dad not be able to access it?

Why not government providing adequate child care to working people?

> Why not contact your local representative and explain the issue in an articulate manner?

I do, but your have to admit there is a chilling effect in left wing spaces where openly supporting men's issues makes you very unpopular.

Re: $70M in 60 Seconds: How Insider Info Helped Someone 28x Their Money

#359

Post by netsharc » Sat, Apr 12, 2025, 4:00 PM UTC

yread wrote: post #309

netsharc wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Probably much easier to rig the elections, just like dozens of "we're democratic!" dictators have done. Erdogan, Putin, Mugabe, Suharto...

You mean like requiring ppl to have a proof of citizenship disenfranchising 21 million https://apnews.com/article/congress-save-act-citizenship-vot...

I thought you're agreeing with me about disenfranchisement and how it's evil, but I can see you can also infer that "Did you know 21 million undocumenteds voted?"...

As your article discusses, requiring that proof means paperwork, paperwork some people might not have (e.g. wives who changed their names).

For example in the UK, the Windrush scandal 1) deported British subjects because the government made irrational demands for documents to prove that they're citizens.

1) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windrush_scandal

Re: $70M in 60 Seconds: How Insider Info Helped Someone 28x Their Money

#360

Post by tmcb » Sat, Apr 12, 2025, 4:03 PM UTC

klipt wrote: post #351

tmcb wrote: post #347

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is actually the opposite. I assume there is no inherent reason why people from other demographics with the required skills and merit cannot be found. Otherwise, there must be a reason why they can’t, and people who think that the current imbalance is perfectly good must have a pretty reasonable explanation to that. Do you have any?

So will the government mandate that 50% of stay at home parents be men? Because as the other poster pointed out, if you push men out of the workplace and out of family life (by favoring custody for women) you just end up with a bunch of unemployed idle men, which is a recipe for revolution. And if 50/50 is the goal, where is the government push for more men in places where they're underrepresented, like university st…

I can’t reply to your other comment for some reason.

You got me, I did not express myself well. I should have said “working people”. I framed it as a women’s issue since you said that the solution to that would be forcing men to trade places with them.

Re: the fact that bringing up men’s issues is kind of taboo to the left, it seems more of a language problem. If you frame it as a “war on men”, that will turn people off. If you say: “look, there are many bright young guys who could be on college that are otherwise deciding to look for work because the economy is not so great”… Maybe people will listen.

Edit: maybe they will reply “EKSUSE MEE??? WHY NOT WOMEN???”. That is obnoxious, I get it. But do they have a point? If you think so, concede. If you do n’t think so, I would like to know more about it. That is what politics is about.