cccc4all

$3.8 million for over 5000 employees affected by discrimination against female and asian software engineers? Where are the condemnation and marches against this systemic injustice against marginalized groups?

$3.8 million is just pocket lint to Google. The sum is so low, it's like someone walking by and ignoring a penny on the ground.

The main question to these type of assertions, what's the alternative?

There are natural patterns in business problems, so there are natural patterns in solutions, which can be encapsulated in best practices.

Companies don't have the time or resources or development skills to come up with elegant, boutique solutions to every problems. Even FAANG companies with billions of dollars to throw at problems hit a natural wall.

So, they resort to proven best practices to solve most problems. It's wise for smaller companies to analyze proven best practices and incorporate them as needed.

I laughed when CNN had to explain $Becky symbol and meaning of the term "wife's boyfriend".

https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/29/investing/wallstreetbets-redd...

It's hilarious how a thread about US immigration studies turned into discussion on German corporate ladder. And, various european attitudes about ethnicities.

Germany is not US. Europe is not US. How they deal with societal situations will be different from how US deals with societal situations.

Are there lots of German/Europe HN users? I am US centric so I tend to think HN is US thing, specifically tech cities, mainly, San Francisco.

The most important aspect of naked short selling is why it's a thing. Naked short selling is used as a weapon by short sellers. The purpose is to push down the stock price by artificially increasing supply relative to demand, perpetuating the sell spiral. Thereby, the short sellers can further increase their profit on short sales.

Could you make that or higher amount in your former country? If not, why not?

But, are they paid 6x the salary?

If not, why not? What is depressing the salary levels at 6x productivity gains? Who are benefiting from gains in productivity and depressed salary?

Melvin Capital claimed they exited all short positions, yet there weren’t any significant change in short %. By all accounts, they had huge percentage of shorts, so them covering shorts should have dropped short % down below 100%.

It sounded too much like a PR move to convince WSB that short squeeze was over. Would Melvin Capital lie about short positions to save $billions of dollars?

Melvin Capital initially claimed their short losses were 30%, now they are claiming short losses over 50%. How are they still losing money on shorts?

Robinhood is done as trading company. After this fiasco, who in their right mind can trust Robinhood for financial future.

The cofounder stated in every interview that it was not a liquidity issue. The actual company stated reasons are still very cagey and ambiguous.

There are all these third parties coming out with shill articles, trying to excuse Robinhood. This is classic propaganda PR campaign.

Robinhood can’t explicitly state what they did for specific reason, because everyone can analyze whether it’s true or not. What is being attempted is to run third party propaganda PR campaign to excuse Robinhood.

Has Robinhood explicitly stated the exact reasons for shutting down buying but allowing selling stocks? If not then why not? Unless Robinhood comes out with detailed legal and business justifications, all these shill excuses are just vapor.

That's the funny thing, that's not what's happening. It would make sense for those companies to declare bankruptcy in these scenarios. Instead, these short seller companies are being propped up by even bigger companies and the entire financial press is pushing FUD propaganda to convince normal people to sell.

This has never happened before. Why is this happening the way it has for past week?

This post can explain why you only need smaller percentage to squeeze short sellers.

https://wallstreetplayboys.com/amc-gamestop-and-nokia-why-it...

The bottom line, everyone knows they can sell to short sellers at ANY price, because the short sellers have to buy at ANY price. Why would anyone sell to short sellers at less than ANY price?

The Robinhood shenanigans that stopped people from buying GME and allowed selling GME. Melvin Capital claiming they got out of short positions, without any significant changes in short %. The entire financial media propaganda telling people to sell GME. etc.

I didn't say WSB crowd was acting with noble reasons, but they are acting with more than financial interests. If you've read recent WSB posts, lot of the emotional appeal is ideological and class fragmentation, than lolz gainz. And, very few people actually posts in forums, so you have to multiply the sentiment by thousands, if not millions.

The bottom line is the price of GME, it's still above $300. Which everyone knows and agrees is over valued. Why, especially after the turbulent week?

The GME situation is huge mess created by billionaire vulture short sellers shorting more than 100% of stocks. Thereby, when you buy current GME stock, the stock also has an attached buyer that has to buy that stock back, at ANY price. All you have to do is simply buy and hold the stock, and the price will go up.

Traditional buy/sell signals are irrelevant, because of the short seller shenanigans. The short sellers created this perfect trap for themselves, now they are scrambling to get out of using every dirty tricks. The more WSB crowd is aware of this scenario, the more they jump in to the diamond hands philosophy.

Time in the market is more important than timing the market, is a common investment advice.

Current GME situation is not investing, it's short term speculation and gambling and ideological tussle and class fragmentation thrown in. All investing strategies and tactics are thrown out the window.

The billionaire vulture short sellers got careless and lazy by shorting 140% of stock. Then, they got caught with their pants down with naked shorts and now squealing to everyone to bail them out. They could have just ate the losses, but they decided to pull all the dirty tricks and shenanigans. It may or may not work.

The WSB crowd battling the billionaire vulture short sellers are out for more than gains.

Gell-Mann Amnesia effect.

https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/65213-briefly-stated-the-ge...

What Mass Media calls facts are more often wrong than right, even without any political bias. When political bias are factored in, so called "facts" are complete opposite of what they are.

I’m going to guess the author has never met or worked with 10X developer, or Rockstar developer, or Ninja developer or many other previous incarnations.

It’s not about mathematical equations or lines of code or some superficial numerical value. Although, side effects of such developers can result in some numerical improvements.

It’s about impact in the project and development team. Being effective and productive in the field.

Techlead has a humorous, and mostly correct take on 10X engineer.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iydpa_gPdes

You're worth what you ask for, not what someone think it's worth. You'll get what you ask for more often than not.

People have worked remote before covid, without any salary adjustments.

HR has to set up these policies in place to make sure their salaries line up with local averages. However, it's up to the management to decide who will fill the positions and at what salary. They will make adjustments to make sure their top performers are compensated properly.

Worst case scenario, move to another company.

The story doesn't say they unloaded all their positions this week. The story says "...disclosed Thursday ...no longer holds any shares of the videogame and consumer electronics retailer."

Did they sell it all on one transaction? or multiple transactions over multiple days? weeks? months? How does companies normally wind down positions?

The diamond hands are betting that GME go to infinity.

The short sellers are betting that GME will go to 0.

One will win and the other will lose. The question is who has the edge?

Just look at what's happening with the market. Brokers are pulling all the shenanigans to convince normal people to sell. All the finance media are shilling for billionaire vulture short sellers. Has this ever happened in the history of finance?

Why are these things happening? Does it seem like the super smart billionaire vulture short sellers have the edge? If they do, why don't they come in and make moves to drive down the prices from current levels?

After all these millions of shares being traded, why is the short still above 100%

Look at the math, the stock is shorted over 100%. Around 120% last time I checked.

Who has 120% of stocks to sell back to billionaire short sellers?

The billionaire vulture short sellers created this mess. Now, they are the one's that have to pay the price.

You can't simply get out of billion dollar positions in a day or so. It takes a while to set up these kind of positions and it takes a while to wind down these kind of positions. Especially when they had to get billions of dollars from other companies to shore up their funds.

Also, where were the market movement indicators that signify billions in transactions? Who were the sellers, who were the buyers?

Until they show receipts, I would be very skeptical of this statement.

Most likely, they are playing word games with "got out of short positions" phrase.

There are many misunderstandings in Software Engineering. The first main misunderstanding is that Software Engineering is about writing code. I would argue that is the main misunderstanding.

In reality, software engineering is about solving problems, business problems, process problems, machine problems, etc. using code in software as a tool.

The 80/20 rule applies here. 80% of time is spent analyzing and developing solutions, 20% of time is spent writing code and developing software.

Too many people focus on the code part, when they should be focusing on problem solving part.

No they did not. The Robinhood co founder stated in every interview that it was not liquidity issue.

Listen to his explanations, he never says what were the legal or business justification for stopping the buys and only allowing the sells.

His only explanations were that the company took the actions just because.

Remote has been an option for many people in tech, even before the covid situation. Most people regularly took work from home days or had regularly scheduled work from home days, at least once or twice a week. Some people spent months in remote situations, working from second homes during ski season or vacation spots.

But, there was a belief amongst all management that they had to have a central place for everyone to gather and do business.

Now, Covid forced the remote issue on many companies. Many companies are crunching numbers on remote work productivity and leasing expensive square footage in expensive cities.

Some decided remote is costing too much in productivity and requiring people to come into the office. Others are finding out that productivity drop is much smaller than expected and office space cost savings are fully justified in going full remote.

This will take at least couple of years to fully shake out and see what the remote situation looks like in the future. One interesting side effect of companies going fully remote is that office space costs will likely drop and change the calculations again, convincing many companies to gradually bring people back to central office.

These are very convenient excuses.

How come this is the first time these actions had to happen?

How convenient that these actions just happen to help out their partners recover $Billions of dollars and cost millions of users $Billions in gains?

How convenient that these actions always help out the billionaire vulture short sellers, always?

Robinhood didn't just stop trading, which would make sense for these kind of trading issues. They stopped normal users from buying these stocke, while letting them liquidate and sell these stocks. Thereby pushing down price and helping out their billionaire vulture short sellers.

Robinhood is done as company, no matter what happens with the lawsuit. They had one job, trade stocks, and they refused to do it at the most critical time under very shady circumstances. How can anyone trust this company with their financial future after today?

There's no proof of this. Look at actual stats, GME is STILL shorted over 100%.

You have fallen victim to propaganda by wall street billionaire vultures. This is not a bubble. This is a high stakes market movement speculation game that billionaire vulture short sellers are playing. They just got careless and lazy and got caught in money losing position. Now, these billionaire vultures are crying and whining to the government to help them with bailouts and change the rules in the middle of the game.

WSB is playing the game fair and square. It's the billionaires that's been short selling and manipulating the markets that got caught with their pants down.

WSB is squeezing the greed out of billionaire vulture short sellers, which has gotten so brazen that they have painted themselves into a corner. Usually, they get away with these kind of shenanigans. But this time, someone who knew the game saw the positions and realized that other player had the edge using a winning strategy. All they have to do is drive the price higher and short sellers have to buy at whatever price to cover their positions.

Think of it like this, someone has to buy an item that you have, at any price. What price would you charge?

This is Censorship with capital C.

Anyone that claims that Discord is private company and can do whatever they want, read the room.

Discord did this because they were likely afraid of negative government attention, SEC, IRS, FTC, FCC etc.

If a private company censors because it thinks that's what the government regulators want them to censor, is it really private company just doing "moderation"?

There are 3 million people at WSB. Are you calling all 3 million "incels" and "white male" or whatever? Why are you calling them "these people"?

Do you think their opinions are less than yours?