951–960 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why is the solution always to either shut something down or to regulate? Why is educating people to act more responsibly never ever considered an option?
We require regulation, just as we require the police, because education doesn't matter to people willing to disregard ethics and harm others for their own gains.
This seems too authoritarian.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Arguably, because we don't put people into office who are able and/or willing to require people to act responsibly. If we chose our politicians more carefully, we'd see better results. But we don't, so we get what we choose.
For everyone willing to talk about "key leverage points in the social graph" it's weird how they won't call those people leaders.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It does feel like a watershed moment regarding hedge funds Let's wait six months. This story is being badly reported all over. I suspect the hedge funds will mostly be fine. >You get people to invest in a stock that is expected by the industry to go belly up. Seriously. It's that easy. It's not illegal. Yes, it is, it's an abusive short squeeze, which is market manipulation.
If anything is market manipulation, its shorting over 100% of a company to push down it's share price even lower and destroy the company
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm sorry but this is a possibly irresponsible take for at least a few reasons. The populism on this issue is completely out of touch with reality. 1) As the stock pops due to irrational upwards pressure - the hedges funds might lose a bit, but in reality a lot of 'regular people' will be left holding the bag. When the stock inevitably crashes, those 'regular people' will lose a lot and it will probably be a more mea…
What about all the people who lost jobs at GameStop when the board got pissed the stock was in the toilet? You have a case of a hedge fund that was playing games to manipulate the price of a stock downward for a quick 400% profit the last few years with what appears to be no hedge on the other side of the bet. They could've bough calls to offset potential losses but they didn't because that wouldn't have meant such i…
I'm saying populist shenanigans don't really defeat banker shenanigans.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No single fund deliberately pushed short interest over 100%. Short interest increasing over 100% is something that happens organically when many firms want to short the same thing. No collusion required. Someone buys a stock from a short seller and sells it short themselves. I will add that short interest > 100% is a very common risk measure that firms with a short position actively track.
I don't know how to verify this, but I've heard one source claim that firms continued to short once it was already over 100%. Even if that's not strictly collusion, it sounds — to my admittedly untrained ear — like a position that the system should want to avoid.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Ideally finance is meant to be about allocation of capital. If a market is allocating capital to a dying company just because meme, then the market isn't serving its purpose. Do you believe in it's right to give power to somebody, whether it will be a government, private party, or a class to rule over allocation of capital, and decide whose capital allocation is good, and whose capital allocation is bad? There is a…
An internet community is "somebody" with a selfish interest that might go against the interest of the wider public.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> And how to do it? You get people to invest in a stock that is expected by the industry to go belly up. A lot of the people involved aren't just buying and holding. They're specifically buying/selling short dated out of the money options in order to move the price. Some understand the market microstructure and the various levers they have to make the price move using what is effectively leverage. > Seriously. It's t…
> Finance is highly regulated and arbitrarily so. But how can you regulate that people get together and buy stock? They need... 1) Internet bulletin board. That's it. The barrier of entry is just so damn low, and that's in part also why this has happened. In hindsight I'm surprised it hasn't happened before but I suppose Covid-19 brought this on. I think it would be easier to regulate something that at least takes a…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is what everyone on discord gets for using an app like this. We all warned you years ago when you moved to it. Mailing lists for slow stuff and IRC for throw away realtime chats.
Some people care about UX.
If you have too much ADHD there's delta chat.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Finance is highly regulated and arbitrarily so. But how can you regulate that people get together and buy stock? They need... 1) Internet bulletin board. That's it. The barrier of entry is just so damn low, and that's in part also why this has happened. In hindsight I'm surprised it hasn't happened before but I suppose Covid-19 brought this on. I think it would be easier to regulate something that at least takes a…
> This time, sure, it was Reddit and the subreddit may be suspended. Next time it'll be a Discord or Telegram board or something. It's just... so easy It's not so easy. There are concentrated tech players. There's decentralized systems but they aren't there yet in terms of usability for millions of people to just log on and use seamlessly like they do w/ Reddit. It may get there eventually, but its nowhere close to b…