Billionaires buy elections, elected officials break funding for public facilities, billionaires get tax cuts, public facilities get bought out with tax cuts.
I wonder when they start introducing their own currencies like in the old mining towns.
I mentioned this on another thread. I tried my best to avoid FB, but then they acquire products like WhatsApp to then hoover up personal data again. This shouldn't be allowed. PII and personal data should be bound to the original terms on which the product launched.
Zuck should find a quiet part of the internet or the metaverse to curl up and fade away. The guy just doesn't have any redeeming qualities.
I first saught out Bing Maps because the aerial views can be set askew from cardinal directions, which allows you to (sometimes) discover objects beneath tree-cover (hidden in top-down views).
I've continued using Bing for digital explorations because the physical printouts have more contrast (i.e. are easier to read; however, alltrails has the best printouts).
Bing seems to list more businesses than other platforms, and presents the information with less clutter.
But ultimately, I use Bing because I can use it while still blocking all other tracking products of its parent company (which is very difficult to do with e.g. Google products — which I just ban entirely).
zuck needs to fade into irrelevance. The guy hasnt done anything interesting in years. Every few years he raids private data and thinks he can do something with it.
Allegedly. And if you read anything about the case its clearly in a very gray area.
Their actions are what you'd expect any firm to do to hedge their exposure. Its just that they were so large and the Indian stock market is relatively so small that they're hedging moved the market.
So the question is, was their market moving hedging actual market manipulation or was it just the same thing every other quant firm would do in the same situation to hedge out their option exposure?
> Their actions are what you'd expect any firm to do to hedge their exposure
No, their actions were the opposite.
They were pushing the price in the same direction as their derivatives holding. A hedge would push it in the opposite direction. (Eg: If you're long calls, you would hedge by selling the underlying, bringing its price down.)
Your comment doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me. By definition, doesn't hedging the market ALWAYS move the market? The indian market was so small the movement was perceptible, but hedging the US market would also move the market, albeit imperceptibly, right?
Also, the absolutely hilarious fact that Jane Street lawyers were instructed not to say the country's name out loud in court to protect trade secrets, yet they utterly failed to do so on multiple occasions.
This and what the article refers to are just two examples of the kind of thing this company considers to be their "business". For another example, Sam Bankman-Fried and his helper Caroline Ellison came from there. They're always looking for schemes to add billions to their accounts, morality be damned.
Right now AI's impact is the equivalent of giving the ancient Egyptians a couple of computer chips. People will eventually figure out what they are, but until then it will only be used as combs, paperweights, pendants etc.
I would say the use cases are only coming into view.
I suppose consumers need to be able to pool their effort to read this. We upload it to a site, see the comments others have made and then decide. If there are changes between the comments and now, then those are highlighted as well. A EULAgrokker.
reply