Statement of SEC Regarding Recent Market Volatility • Hacker News Board

Re: Statement of SEC Regarding Recent Market Volatility

#261

Post by koheripbal » Fri, Jan 29, 2021, 4:16 PM UTC

iso1631 wrote: post #242

tompccs wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am so sick of this 'stay in your lane' attitude. Time and time again, experts have been shown to have consensus opinions which are wildly off from reality. You can almost set your watch to how often an outsider will analyse a situation from first principles and make money off the 'experts', especially in the stock market. You're welcome to your opinion but this appeal to authority is seriously wearing thin. Pretty…

From what I can tell almost no professional investers beat the market, almost nobody wins the lottery. Why should I listen to lottery players or professional wall street gamers?

Almost no doctors beat terminal cancer. Im going to try this crystal healing method...

Re: Statement of SEC Regarding Recent Market Volatility

#262

Post by TeMPOraL » Fri, Jan 29, 2021, 4:16 PM UTC

TameAntelope wrote: post #206

Miner49er wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Right now it appears that the public wants to be able to trade on their terms because there is this narrative that the little guy is finally sticking it to the big bad hedge funds. In reality there is probably very little truth to this. The fact that buying was limited yesterday is evidence that the little guy is actually winning here. Trading was stopped to save the hedge funds, because if they go under or lose to…

I cannot stress this strongly enough -- the fact that buying was limited yesterday is not evidence that the little guy is actually winning. As has been explained in multiple other places, the limitations were as a result of Robinhood et. al. being unable to cover the risks involved in providing instant trading capabilities for a stock as volatile as the ones that got restricted. That has nothing to do with "the littl…

Here's the thing, though - and please correct me if I'm wrong: it's not just Robin Hood. Many other trading apps blocked GME buys yesterday and today, and some of them are blaming this on banks and brokerages upstream of the apps.

That to me looks like the clearing houses themselves are worried, which means the whole thing poses a risk (even if easily mitigated) to the greater market.

Re: Statement of SEC Regarding Recent Market Volatility

#263

Post by DanBC » Fri, Jan 29, 2021, 4:16 PM UTC

xapata wrote: post #240

kodah wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Personally, I think smart people just do this. When I got sick with COVID I cannot begin to describe the number of people who became doctors during this unprecedented time , only to send me outdated comments, articles, and speculation. All of these people thought they were smarter than the instruction I received from a real doctor, nurse practitioner, and the CDC. These were smart people, though, and mostly (but not…

> a real doctor, nurse practitioner, and the CDC Sadly, many doctors and nurses are statistically illiterate. I know, because I (try to) teach them statistics. Remember, the Surgeon General of the CDC said that, "[masks] are NOT effective in preventing general public from catching #Coronavirus," perhaps in some misguided belief that avoiding panicked mask-buying was more important than a mask-wearing public. [Sorry f…

Can you link to the papers that were available in March 2020 that showed that masks are effective?

Use any definition of "mask" and "effective" you want, but preferably effective should include some concept of "prevents spread of respiratory disease".

Covid is a serious illness. Far too many people have been told, and believe, that they can continue their normal day to day life so long as they put mask on. This is untrue, and this advice has driven mass infection and death.

Re: Statement of SEC Regarding Recent Market Volatility

#264

Post by philosopher1234 » Fri, Jan 29, 2021, 4:16 PM UTC

nvarsj wrote: post #205

sidlls wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is pretty accurate even for many software and tech related discussions here (it’s a big field with lots of specialties).

Yes, it's a reductionist argument that can apply to literally anything. Let's just delete all user discussions on the internet, and only allow PhD granted experts to discuss things on panels where they must provide primary sources for everything. Or you could simply point out when someone is wrong, and explain why, assuming you are an expert. Then we all learn.

You could interpret it as an insightful observation rather than an argument to delete all comments.

Re: Statement of SEC Regarding Recent Market Volatility

#265

Post by A12-B » Fri, Jan 29, 2021, 4:17 PM UTC

iso1631 wrote: post #242

tompccs wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am so sick of this 'stay in your lane' attitude. Time and time again, experts have been shown to have consensus opinions which are wildly off from reality. You can almost set your watch to how often an outsider will analyse a situation from first principles and make money off the 'experts', especially in the stock market. You're welcome to your opinion but this appeal to authority is seriously wearing thin. Pretty…

From what I can tell almost no professional investers beat the market, almost nobody wins the lottery. Why should I listen to lottery players or professional wall street gamers?

Reddit stock traders, some of whom are professional, have consistently beaten the market by using collective action.

Re: Statement of SEC Regarding Recent Market Volatility

#266

Post by hrktb » Fri, Jan 29, 2021, 4:17 PM UTC

kodah wrote: post #185

jancsika wrote: post #121

A Moment in the Life of an HN Genius: 1. Reads a technical document outside their domain. 2. Feels dumb because they don't have a grasp on any of the concepts. 3. Too busy to use the very internet which some of them probably helped build to magically render learning materials to the screen in front of them at zero marginal cost. 4. Sees the word "manipulation" 5. Substitutes the laymen's definition of "manipulation"…

Personally, I think smart people just do this. When I got sick with COVID I cannot begin to describe the number of people who became doctors during this unprecedented time , only to send me outdated comments, articles, and speculation. All of these people thought they were smarter than the instruction I received from a real doctor, nurse practitioner, and the CDC. These were smart people, though, and mostly (but not…

I agree in principle. Then in real life example you will have real doctors and nurses giving conflicting advices and having wildly different viewpoints on the details.

The easy to point to example is how a lot of doctors viewed masks at the beginning of the pandemic. Or how trickle down economics is also endorsed by experts. Or experts opinions on mental health drugs. And so many other subjects where it won’t be hard to find an expert on the dumb side of the argument.

I think we should rely on experts, but we can’t dismiss people’s doubts or research just with a “I’ve seen a real doctor” slight of hand.

Re: Statement of SEC Regarding Recent Market Volatility

#267

Post by jaywalk » Fri, Jan 29, 2021, 4:17 PM UTC

SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #111

qmmmur wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People are free to purchase stock how they want to. If those people collect together and discuss potentially profitable strategies for trading who is to stop them? Do you think its possible youve fallen ill to the rhetoric that this is bad purely because the rich people didn't get their way?

I have a general, all-purpose opposition to financial trading that’s about exploiting weird market structure tricks to screw people over rather than expressing beliefs about the value of the underlying things being traded. Institutional traders too often get away with doing that kind of thing, and I’m hardly losing sleep over the particular targets of this campaign, but we can’t let the takeaway here be “it’s fine as…

Imagine calling the simple act of buying a stock "exploiting weird market structure tricks to screw people over"

Re: Statement of SEC Regarding Recent Market Volatility

#268

Post by adaml_623 » Fri, Jan 29, 2021, 4:18 PM UTC

iamacyborg wrote: post #177

josephorjoe wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whatever else happens, Robinhood should not survive this. They clearly violated their customers' trust, so their customers should leave them. And I will be completely unsurprised if when the dust settles it turns out they acted illegally. Also, they suck at lying.

You may want to check what happened to certain brokers on Jan 15th 2015 before you start chucking accusations out. It’s clear you don’t understand how these brokers work and how they interface with the broader market.

Why would you post that without including information about the event and brokers you are referencing. You're not really adding to the information content on this site.

I assume you were talking about this event: https://www.leaprate.com/forex/liquidity/algo-traders-worsen...

Re: Statement of SEC Regarding Recent Market Volatility

#269

Post by mindslight » Fri, Jan 29, 2021, 4:18 PM UTC

briefcomment wrote: post #159

numair wrote: post #107

Okay kids, story time. After the crash of 2008, I spent some time working with Dick Fuld. Yes, the former head of Lehman Brothers. Yes, the one people describe as “disgraced,” among other terms. Here’s the irony, though — Dick was one of the only people I encountered at that level of business/finance who wasn’t a scumbag. Unlike so many virtue-signaling Silicon Valley darlings, the guy behind the curtain was an honor…

> "these supposed “adults in the room” who are so much smarter and better than the the “retail investors” are pretty much the same sort of immature, self-centered children as the other side. The difference is, they’ve got the regulators and the politicians in their pockets." Absolutely. Dick and Trump are examples of scapegoats. Throw someone under the bus publicly, so you can continue doing what you're doing while t…

I don't know how it's possible to spin someone who made many public statements disrupting our society's pandemic response from a position of high authority as a mere "scapegoat", but at this point I'm no longer amazed.

Re: Statement of SEC Regarding Recent Market Volatility

#270

Post by camgunz » Fri, Jan 29, 2021, 4:18 PM UTC

TameAntelope wrote: post #206

Miner49er wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Right now it appears that the public wants to be able to trade on their terms because there is this narrative that the little guy is finally sticking it to the big bad hedge funds. In reality there is probably very little truth to this. The fact that buying was limited yesterday is evidence that the little guy is actually winning here. Trading was stopped to save the hedge funds, because if they go under or lose to…

I cannot stress this strongly enough -- the fact that buying was limited yesterday is not evidence that the little guy is actually winning. As has been explained in multiple other places, the limitations were as a result of Robinhood et. al. being unable to cover the risks involved in providing instant trading capabilities for a stock as volatile as the ones that got restricted. That has nothing to do with "the littl…

What you're saying may be true. But then I don't know why Robinhood wouldn't say that in their first statement addressing why they disabled buying [1].

[1]: https://blog.robinhood.com/news/2021/1/28/keeping-customers-...