jkulubya

I’ll agree that you+ai is creating a pleasant sequence of sounds ie music. And I don’t think anyone has the right to say (within reason) what is music or isn’t.

But we might need new vocabulary to differentiate that from the act of learning & using different layers of musical theory + physical ability on an instrument (including tools like supercollider) + your lived experience as a human to produce music.

Maybe some day soon all the songs on the radio and Spotify will be ai generated and hyper personalized and we’ll happily dance to it, but I’ll bet my last dollar that as long as humans exist, they’ll continue grinding away (manually?) at whatever musical instrument of the time.

Sure, but the problem isn’t that Citadel is expecting that the price will drop. The claim was that Citadel can take a short position without other parties in the market knowing, and finding out only from their annual financials.

That’s not true, because, amongst other reasons, everything you’ve listed (synthetic shares/derivatives/kicking the can down the road) can be seen by others in the market.

(Naked) Short all you want, there’s nothing wrong morally with betting in that direction. But it will be picked up.

A naked short on their own account would be illegal. A time-bound naked short to fulfill their role as market maker would be acceptable.

But even then, all trades are either eventually settled at some time t, or fail to settle, e.g. if the seller is not good for the shares. Any of these 2 events happening is reported outside of a single broker-dealer, i.e. public info. And to settle a trade, you will need the actual shares, that you've either bought or borrowed.

All this info, settlements, failures, stock buys & loans is visible to other parties in the market.

If your point is that the Citadel is breaking the law, and not reporting what they should, when they should, then that's a problem. But there would be so many other parties discovering it way before their annual financials are published.

Leaving aside the veracity of that figure, if they've sold $60B of shares they don't own then they must've sold shares they borrowed in some way, and that shows up in the demand/supply. Someone (or someones) in the market would know.

Location: Ottawa, ON, Canada

Remote: Remote/Hybrid/Office

Willing to relocate: Within Southern Ontario

Technologies: C#, F#, Javascript, .NET, ASP.NET, Postgres, MSSQL, React, Vue, Kubernetes, Docker, Azure Résumé/CV: Available on request

Email: [email protected]

I've got 6+ years of experience doing backend software development mainly using the dotnet stack. 4+ years building backoffice software in a stock exchange/clearing house environment (trading/clearing/settlement/payments/FIX/SWIFT/bank integration, etc.), and 2 years working on the backend of a public transit application.

I'd love to stay within the payments/finance space but I'm a quick learner and open to something new.

Not really. Best to think of .net “core” as just .net.

Anything that was in the old .net that isn’t in core today won’t ever be.

Then there’s stuff that was missing in the earlier versions of core that existed in old dotnet. Some of it they later realised was useful for newer apps or apps migrated to core. These pieces were ported over by Microsoft or replaced by 3rd party implementations (e.g. avalonia for xplat ui).

(.net core is actually officially just .net, they dropped the core from the name)

15kph is definitely not “a little faster”.

But maybe the more interesting discussion would be, why, apart from the obviously not true 30kph national speed limit, Latvia seems to be doing okay without this excess of speed?

Property accessors `.name` and methods `ElementAt(i)` can have side-effects. From just eyeballing the code, that together with the gc issue would make the compiler in my brain wary of removing the loop. I don't personally know if it's possible to convince the C# compiler that it's safe.

There’s no reason (other than cost and your current wealth and bank risk management) why you couldn’t get a personal loan for the full purchase price of the house, and pay the seller the cash price. You’d then see your bank account balance go up by the house’s cost, withdraw the cash and then pay the seller.

I’m not sure what bank would give a normal person that kind of money unsecured but you could secure it with e.g. another house you own. Most people don’t have a spare house, so the banks optimise the process for the everyday scenario where the buyer doesn’t need to see their bank balance go up. But money is still being created in there somewhere

Yeah, we’re gonna have to agree to disagree.

Do I personally think that the 2x fuel imbalance is a problem? Nope, I’d happily get on that plane

Could this situation become a safety issue? Yes it could.

Is it possible that there’s more to this situation than safety? Yeah, probably. Maybe they want shiny new planes on the route. But also, the passengers are paying customers with consumer rights - these are being enforced

Are the Ghanaian authorities not a sane regulator? I’ve got no reason to believe they aren’t being proper regulators. There is a possible safety issue that’s well within their mandate.

What happens when you’re dealing with regulators is if you’ve got a good relationship with them, then all the optional stuff (and some of the mandatory stuff) is optional. If not, then you’re gonna have to check every single box and then some. See Boeing in the US vs Europe.

Call it politics, call it whatever but it is what it is

From what I’ve read, the Ghanaian regulators have demanded that that specific aircraft not be flown within their jurisdiction because they don’t like the recurring issue with the fuel imbalance (…and advised that Delta flies newer planes because Ghanaians don’t like the old ones)

The FAA/EASA not being concerned by it (from what we know), doesn’t mean that there isn’t a possible safety issue to investigate.

It’s also easy to have politics and safety i.e. regulation mix in ways that aren’t so black and white. Consider the time it took for the 737 Max to be recertified in the rest of the world vs the US. Do you think that was all safety? Or some combination of safety and politics?

So no, I don’t think it’s possible to categorically state that it has nothing to do with safety.

I feel it needs to be pointed out that almost all, if not all, countries have a long history of using access to their aviation industries/airspace/airports/etc as a political tool - so Ghana is far from being alone in that sense and I don’t think it adds much to either argument

The original poster is going slightly off the beaten path and therefore has to manually compose three or four different concepts together to come to the right solution vs relying on the out of the box experience.

I, and a lot of other devs, would be able to solve this particular problem without looking up the docs but I can’t assume any knowledge on the poster’s behalf so I posted the links to the docs about the building blocks and an article showing one possible way of composing them.

The same exact problem as posed by the poster was thought of by the dotnet/aspnet teams and the pieces (apis/docs/samples) are all there, just not the default.