Oil futures drunk-trading incident
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
I used to dislike how restrictive some policies can feel. Now I can appreciate that at least some of those policies protect me by making it hard for me to exercise poor decision making without my coworkers signing off on it.
(Note: "some". "Security theater" is still very much a thing, but turns out that not all pain-in-the-neck controls are there just to be annoying.)
He said no, and didn't allow me to, on the basis that you're being trusted to work here, so you're also being trusted not to mess with anything you don't need to. Therefore we didn't have to limit access to anyone.
I felt that was missing the point since there could also be accidents.
Late in my career, when someone asks me if I want "root", I often decline. There's a lot to be said for limiting one's exposure to those risks and having solid plausible deniability if someone hoses some crucial system. (Not to mention being "unable" to access a lot of systems at 3am to help fix messes someone else made.)
I found out I still had access to my account for a previous employer on some random industry website when my 1Password autofilled the login and it worked. I contacted my old boss and asked him to immediately remove my access, and confirmed that I couldn't get in anymore. The last thing I want is for something to change or break, and for them to say "hey, that's funny, our old employee is still logging in..."
I actively don't want to have access on things I don't need.
My intuition is that a disproportionate amount of stupid decisions in the world take place between Midnight and 6 AM local time.
Interestingly, in the current crisis many regulatory authorities are waiving these rules.
Of course, they also had fitness for duty rules that forbade us from working after having a drink, which is good.
Amazing that changing bits in some databases can change one's life dramatically.
They laughed at it in the interview and then hired her right away. Goes to show people sorta understand when it comes to alcohol it's not really their fault in the couple one off scenarios.
That being said, I don't think I'd hold a DUI against a person, mainly because the system is set up to fuck you. If you decline a breath-a-lyzer, then you suffer nearly the same fate as failing it. At minimum you lose your license, at worst you get arrested and they get a warrant to take a blood sample. It's completely possible to get punished for drunk driving without ever touching the stuff. I've been pulled over at night and experienced an officer absolutely trying to pin me for DUI despite clear evidence to the contrary.
Police love to brag about how expensive DUIs, I've seen lots of anti-drunk driving billboards that reference cost in some way. And knowing police forces in the US, well all know they are pocketing a healthy chunk of change from each DUI.
Now, if you have nine DUIs, that's a different story...
Now if you want to argue that the system is ineffective at reducing DUIs, that’s a different argument.
I actually live in Wisconsin where I probably can't count how many times I've seen on the news someone getting pulled over for their n'th DUI. It doesn't even phase me and the funny part is they never get jail time, major fines, or felonies.
How many Germans do you think will take the risk of a DUI to drive home as opposed to walking? Granted not everybody is driving over the limit here, but a large majority of them are teetering at it. I mean I've done it, but I knew I had to drive so I held off and waited for some of the affects to subside. Still, I gotta get home, and a cab is not an option often times.
It's a cultural thing that we'd gladly get rid of, if we could afford the alternative of a robust public transport system. But we don't, so it's a risk people often take.
Frankly walking the 20 miles should be your last option, not driving it.
Also being America, home of what feels like the home of capitalism which a lot of Europeans make it out to be, since the law only prosecutes you if you get caught, people take the risk. Because there is that cultural precedent, cab's don't bother competing cause nobody pays for it anyway.
Also for reference, you're only getting a cab in an area that is within city limits no further than like 5-10km outside of it. Any further, you're on your own.
You'd think that there'd be a "thriving" cab market, but cabs literally only exist in major cities. They do not exist in the places 20-30km out. Why would I go to those bars? Well...weddings, events, parties, where people live, etc. Also cabs charge out the ass so risking a DUI is oftentimes worth it. If you take a cab, you're out like $30-$50 bucks sometimes in those rural areas. If you get a DUI, in my state, it's like $150 for a first time offense. So in essence people drive normally, avoid main highways or take backroads where cops don't camp out.
Last decade? We all make mistakes when we're young, so who am I to judge.
Last week? Yeah, no way in hell I'm hiring you.
That is never the case in the US.
However I am from Wisconsin and I can vouch for that. DUI's are like misdemeanors, no matter how many felonies of them you've gotten. So long as "DUI" is after it and you're not doing a driving job, nobody cares.
It doesn't even phase me anymore to be honest.
It’s a bit more than just some bits changing, trades with real money happened on an exchange.
(My Series 7, though, doesn't recommend doing anything like what they're doing.)
Also, I wouldn't consider the financial industry bloated, at least not any more than other industries.
How would you like the industry to be structured?
With equal access to market opportunities, maybe.
What is the risk illustrated here? A trading firm losing a few million dollars isn't a big deal in terms of the overall global economy.
Price differences in iron ore by location stabilizing from buying high, selling low, and stockpiling some to prepare for supply disruption and variable input is promoting efficiency.
Preventing some idiot from getting drunk and buying $70 million worth of iron ore weighing many thousands of tons when he thought he was buying his wife a $70 iron has nothing to do with risk or efficiency.