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

More than 10 firms pay up to $100k a month for access to Truth Social posts

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 335 posts

Re: More than 10 firms pay up to $100k a month for access to Truth Social posts

#321

Post by sethammons »

micromacrofoot wrote: post #318
sethammons wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is absolutely not true. Your brother in law gives you insider information and you use it, you go to prison. You have no fiduciary duty, but you still had insider information. I have seen this happen in real life.

it is true, look it up — the brother in law works because there's breach of duty in the chain ... in the truth social case there's no breach of duty if the president is the one shifting the market without a direct link in the chain. Companies aren't saying "hey we want you to manipulate the market for us" — the president is just outright manipulating it, telling people he knows ahead of time, and reaping the profits…

> section 10(b), and Rule 10b-5 thereunder, each executive branch employee, each judicial officer, and each judicial employee owes a duty arising from a relationship of trust and confidence to the United States Government and the citizens of the United States with respect to material, nonpublic information derived from such person's position as an executive branch employee, judicial officer, or judicial employee or gained from the performance of such person's official responsibilities

https://www.congress.gov/bill/112th-congress/senate-bill/203...

Seems pretty clear to me

Re: More than 10 firms pay up to $100k a month for access to Truth Social posts

#322

Post by micromacrofoot »

sethammons wrote: post #321
micromacrofoot wrote: post #318

Earlier quoted context omitted.

it is true, look it up — the brother in law works because there's breach of duty in the chain ... in the truth social case there's no breach of duty if the president is the one shifting the market without a direct link in the chain. Companies aren't saying "hey we want you to manipulate the market for us" — the president is just outright manipulating it, telling people he knows ahead of time, and reaping the profits…

> section 10(b), and Rule 10b-5 thereunder, each executive branch employee, each judicial officer, and each judicial employee owes a duty arising from a relationship of trust and confidence to the United States Government and the citizens of the United States with respect to material, nonpublic information derived from such person's position as an executive branch employee, judicial officer, or judicial employee or g…

> nonpublic information

the crux will lie here, the information is made public, and access is only restricted temporarily (possibly seconds)... this may be enough to circumvent the law as written

it's not clear at all legally speaking

Re: More than 10 firms pay up to $100k a month for access to Truth Social posts

#323

Post by ok123456 »

leobg wrote: post #281
ok123456 wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The API was free then

I don’t think the “Firehose” level was. I think it was 50k/mo or something. That was before AI training was a thing.

You didn't need "Firehose" level to write a simple bot that polled realDonaldTrump every minute or so.

Re: More than 10 firms pay up to $100k a month for access to Truth Social posts

#324

Post by senordevnyc »

ceejayoz wrote: post #291
senordevnyc wrote: post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But...countries, individuals, and companies the world over are loaning the US money right now . They're trading with the US, they're doing joint military exercises, they're forming new alliances, they're visiting the US, they're sending their kids to school here, they're buying real estate here. Don't get me wrong, I loathe Trump and what his band of nutjobs has done to this country. The damage is deep and long-lasti…

> We're talking about the claim that "Nobody and no country will trust the US or their commitments ever again." > Which is nonsensical, as proven by all your handy stats showing that many, many people, companies, and countries still trust the US. Hurr durr, yes, it's not an instant process. You slayed the strawman, saving you from engaging with the points everyone's making! The collapse of the USSR took decades, too.…

The point that everyone is making is that the world has fundamentally changed because of Trump, and "nobody and no country will trust the US or their commitments ever again".

It's been repeatedly demonstrated that this certainly isn't true now, so you're moving the goalposts to some indeterminate point in the future where it will be true, with no idea of when. "Decades", apparently.

So I guess the claim has now been watered down from "nobody will trust the US again" to the idea of a gradual decline of the US over decades. Hardly a unique insight, or one worth really discussing. It's near impossible to predict what will happen in the world over the coming decades.

What we can definitely say right now is that the claim as stated is bullshit. Perhaps it's a strawman from what you actually meant, but I can only respond to all the words and arguments you actually provided.

EDIT: for fun, I clicked on your link about the "staggering" drop in tourism. It's down a whopping 5.5%. Only 68 million visitors in 2025 vs 72 million in 2024.

Time to pack it up and go home, the US had a good run, but we're clearly a failed state and no one wants to come here anymore.

Re: More than 10 firms pay up to $100k a month for access to Truth Social posts

#325

Post by senordevnyc »

bryanlarsen wrote: post #293
senordevnyc wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fair, I did not see that :) I would assume that you can take virtually any society that goes through rapid change over the course of a few decades and make all manner of cherry-picked charts like this. Just ignore all the charts with shapes that don't fit your hypothesis (like they show divergence way outside 1971, or gasp , they show positive changes!). Honestly, I find the attitude that the best times in America we…

I didn't say the best times in the US were 50-60 years ago. I said that historians would consider the start of the decline was 1969 or 1973 or similar. Declines start in the second derivative -- progress is positive, but the rate of progress increases is decreasing. It takes a long time with a negative second derivative to make the first derivative negative, but the decline started when the second derivative turned n…

Declines start in the second derivative -- progress is positive, but the rate of progress increases is decreasing.

What? Since when?

"My health is declining" = "Actually, my health is improving, but not quite as rapidly as it once was."

Re: More than 10 firms pay up to $100k a month for access to Truth Social posts

#326

Post by senordevnyc »

ceejayoz wrote: post #290
senordevnyc wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fair, I did not see that :) I would assume that you can take virtually any society that goes through rapid change over the course of a few decades and make all manner of cherry-picked charts like this. Just ignore all the charts with shapes that don't fit your hypothesis (like they show divergence way outside 1971, or gasp , they show positive changes!). Honestly, I find the attitude that the best times in America we…

> So let me ask it this way: you can be born at a random place as a random person in America. You can't control your gender, your race, your sexual orientation, your intelligence, your socioeconomic standing, your family, your health, nothing. The only thing you can pick is the year. 2012, as long as I can bring some news articles with me, to convince people that https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/04/10/473…

So not a serious answer, as expected.

Re: More than 10 firms pay up to $100k a month for access to Truth Social posts

#327

Post by micromacrofoot »

DaiPlusPlus wrote: post #320
micromacrofoot wrote: post #318

Earlier quoted context omitted.

it is true, look it up — the brother in law works because there's breach of duty in the chain ... in the truth social case there's no breach of duty if the president is the one shifting the market without a direct link in the chain. Companies aren't saying "hey we want you to manipulate the market for us" — the president is just outright manipulating it, telling people he knows ahead of time, and reaping the profits…

“The chain” and “fiduciary duty”, which I feel you’re putting too much weight on, are not really relevant, IMO, because (and to my surprise, I’ll admit, “insider trading” is still not really defined in law: https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/IF11966 > Despite the attention insider trading attracts, legislators have not enacted a statutory definition for the offense. But in any event; the sitting US president certai…

the chain leading back to fiduciary duty is a pretty reliable signal, despite not being codified

> But in any event; the sitting US president certainly has a “fiduciary duty” and responsibility to all Americans; whatever he’s doing now is not that.

it's debatable which is why there's no mechanism allowing courts to shut it down immediately, a big part of the issue is that the information is also released to the public and the short window of time between privileged and public access hasn't been tested this way before

Re: More than 10 firms pay up to $100k a month for access to Truth Social posts

#328

Post by bryanlarsen »

senordevnyc wrote: post #325
bryanlarsen wrote: post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't say the best times in the US were 50-60 years ago. I said that historians would consider the start of the decline was 1969 or 1973 or similar. Declines start in the second derivative -- progress is positive, but the rate of progress increases is decreasing. It takes a long time with a negative second derivative to make the first derivative negative, but the decline started when the second derivative turned n…

Declines start in the second derivative -- progress is positive, but the rate of progress increases is decreasing. What? Since when? "My health is declining" = "Actually, my health is improving, but not quite as rapidly as it once was."

Yes. There are many people who define "over the hill" as something like "I have to work harder now to improve my fitness than I used to have to".

Re: More than 10 firms pay up to $100k a month for access to Truth Social posts

#329

Post by ceejayoz »

senordevnyc wrote: post #324
ceejayoz wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We're talking about the claim that "Nobody and no country will trust the US or their commitments ever again." > Which is nonsensical, as proven by all your handy stats showing that many, many people, companies, and countries still trust the US. Hurr durr, yes, it's not an instant process. You slayed the strawman, saving you from engaging with the points everyone's making! The collapse of the USSR took decades, too.…

The point that everyone is making is that the world has fundamentally changed because of Trump, and "nobody and no country will trust the US or their commitments ever again". It's been repeatedly demonstrated that this certainly isn't true now, so you're moving the goalposts to some indeterminate point in the future where it will be true, with no idea of when. "Decades", apparently. So I guess the claim has now been…

> It's been repeatedly demonstrated that this certainly isn't true now…

Yes, that's what "will" means.

(Nor have you demonstrated this, as you continue to act like doing business with a used car salesman is evidence of trusting said used car salesman.)

Keep winning that battle against unmade assertions, though. We believe in you!

> EDIT: for fun, I clicked on your link

Ah, so you're not engaging in good faith in an actual discussion. I do appreciate the confirmation.

Re: More than 10 firms pay up to $100k a month for access to Truth Social posts

#330

Post by gchamonlive »

croon wrote: post #316
gchamonlive wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you seen the state of AAA gaming and blockbusters lately? Even music is being utterly destroyed by the streaming platforms and record labels greed, so yeah it might have been in the 80s up until the 2010s, but enshitification got the best of the US I'm afraid so not even culture anymore. It's just decacence. It's not all US, but as you said things start in the US and trickles down across the rest of the world, s…

I don't think they're merely referring to media/arts as culture. Enshittification is culture too, and it's certainly spreading.

Agreed neither am I
Post reply on HN