Recent submissions

Comment · 1 month ago
We write up timelines. We reconstruct decisions. We explain dependencies. At the end of it, we hand over a document that contains the specific combination of events that led to the incident. Everyone nods their head, says "that makes sense", and we all move on with our day.

...huh? I've been in corporate America for 19 years now and I've never once had this happen. I've never seen anyone just look for the cause and not ask what can be done to prevent it in the future. Everyone KNOWS that question is coming next.

Comment · 6 years ago
I WFH once a week and as-needed. Starting Monday we are all WFH for 2-3 weeks.

For productivity, I absolutely require either a docking station or some sort of KVM switch setup so I can use a regular keyboard, mouse, and monitor. That, or I just remote desktop right into my secured work device which essentially serves the same purpose. I lock myself in my home office and tell the wife and kids to act like I'm at the actual office.

The work/life balance is actually better because I don't have to commute. Just make sure if you normally go to the gym that you keep that up...assuming your gym doesn't close because of this. The gym seems like a primary place to close down because of this virus.

We use Skype and Teams to keep the chic chat style banter and useless meme-sharing alive and well.

Comment · 6 years ago
I can see it. If you are healthy and you know that for most people the virus is mild and the mortality rate is roughly on par with the flu (they previously had it higher but the latest numbers look to be more like the flu at 0.1%, mostly all elderly or already ill), and you know the ships are likely to have less people on them, and you can likely get a deal, and they'll probably treat you like gold if you go...yeah I can see it.

Hell, just writing that out actually makes me think twice about calling and booking something. But I have young children and my wife would be unnecessarily worried the whole time and she doesn't even like cruises.

Comment · 6 years ago
I think the solution I use personally would also serve your purpose. I use KeeWeb (app.keeweb.info). It's a web app that caches in your browser and only runs locally. It also has a desktop version for Windows as well. I keep the web app up on my Android Chrome all the time since there's no phone specific app and it works beautifully.

You can store the database (encrypted of course) in a Dropbox account that it can connect to. The desktop version can also periodically store backups locally on any device you want. If you treat the Dropbox as the centralized master, every one of your employees can simply use either the Windows desktop app or just keep a browser tab open with it (like I do at work). Any changes anyone makes will instantly be reflected across all instances.

I've never tried using for more than my 3 devices, but I don't see why it wouldn't work seamlessly.

Comment · 6 years ago
That's somewhat correct. But it wasn't that they didn't allow those people to sell. In the film they were dealing with specialty derivative products that weren't traded by your average person. The derivative products in the film were sort of like bond pricing where price discovery isn't obvious and determining a fair price is a bit subjective since the volume was very low. So when people like Michael Burry (Bale's character) called to see what kind of price they could get, the banks would give him a bullshit, obnoxiously low offer price they'd be willing to give him because correctly valuing these derivatives would bankrupt the banks. So they held them on the books with fake valuations to stay afloat while they reduced their risk. Then, after doing all that they could fairly price them, which is when Burry makes a metric shit ton of money basically overnight - because he is finally able to get a fair price.

For example, if we took a simpler example of something more people are familiar with like options...let's say you buy a put at a strike of 100. The stock is trading right around 100. The market tanks like it has been doing and the stock goes down to 80. That's great for you since you had the put. You technically have the right to buy the shares at the market and shove them onto someone and force them to pay you 100. Most of the time, since we're dealing with derivatives, they just trade the value of the option itself and skip dealing with the underlying security because it takes a lot of capital (100 shares * 80 bucks each in this case). So the value of the option (the derivative) should be around $20 as you approach expiration and the premium fades off. If the market maker for the options has way too much exposure and wrote naked puts (meaning they didn't have the underlying security) they took on a ton of risk and basically got fucked. In this scenario it's like Burry calling and finding out his options are worth like $1.50 instead of $20 simply because they are thinly traded and therefore can't get a good price by anyone. This actually happens on some options - you'll see a huge spread between the bid and ask on some options so it's not like it doesn't happen even for this type of retail-friendly derivative.

Comment · 6 years ago
This isn't quite true. I get what you're saying, but from a technical perspective, it's not accurate. The markets also go up based on the total money supply in the system. If the government takes on a lot of debt, eventually a portion of that makes its way to the stock market, among other places.

You don't actually need to improve efficiency/productivity if the government has tools like the discount rate, open market operations, the ability to alter margin requirements on derivatives, fed funds rate, as well as programs and policies like MMIF, TAF, CPPF, ABCP, TALF, ZIRP, to manipulate the money supply and the velocity/flow rates of money.

Comment · 6 years ago
Time-based options have a fixed cost which you pay up front. So again, there is no risk of insolvency because you've already paid up front and capped your losses.
Comment · 6 years ago
Pelican Cove is being built as we speak.
Comment · 6 years ago
They're only good because they were repeatedly given an infinite amount of money for 2 decades by investors while their retail operations lost money so that they could nail the implementation and the promise that they would figure out how to make it profitable.
Comment · 6 years ago
Whatever happened to the RFID concept where they (not Amazon, but others) previously envisioned attaching small, cheap RFID badges to all items and then you would just do one big, quick scan at the end and it would read all the RFID tags in your cart at once and you could walk out?

I like that idea better, honestly. It's more accurate and doesn't require video monitoring and all sorts of AI/ML/DL algorithms. Though, I don't know the practicality of attaching RFIDs to everything, nor the cost. And I assume some people would try to just rip them off, which I imagine would be the biggest concern, in addition to having the staff attach them to everything.

Comment · 6 years ago
OP said nothing about timing the market. As you mentioned, that's the entire opposite of DCA. I take your interpretation to be a bit disingenuous and lacking in good faith.

OPs point is clearly that the panic selling is not rational and they are acting accordingly. Whether or not that's correct remains to be seen, however.

Comment · 6 years ago
At the risk of sounding less than helpful or pessimistic, the first thing that jumped out at me when reading your post is that you are going about this backwards.

I'm not saying you can't or wont' succeed. I have no idea.

But it seems like the first thing that happened is that you decided you wanted to start a business. Usually it's the reverse - you get inspired by discovering a problem and realize you have the skillset and motivation to solve it and then you come to the realization that you need to start a business to do that. For founders/entrepreneurs with experience having done that previously, this is likely a scenario with a much higher probability of success.

But I imagine the success rate of people who say "I want to start my own business" and then look for a business to start have much lower success rates.

I'm not trying to rain no your parade at all. Just wanted to give you something to think about before you spend a fortune in time and/or money starting something. I could easily be wrong, though. Just food for thought.

Comment · 6 years ago
Fair enough, but the screenshot that one client posted definitely shows their links generating dates for 3/3 on 3/2. That's highly suspicious in of itself. Also, the fact that their website previously said they had identified the cause and now it doesn't is also suspicious to me. I'm not a client so I don't care either way. I'm just saying I don't inherently believe a word RH says when they have so much to lose.
Comment · 6 years ago
I might believe the response from RH if 1) this didn't happen exactly 4 years ago 2) admission of this being the issue didn't expose them to a negligence lawsuit which could easily bankrupt the company 3) the original tweet didn't have a screenshot of the app building links to 3/3/2020 data on 3/2/2020

Live from the official Hacker News API

A modern reader for Hacker News · SvelteKit + Skeleton