3 ms·

> What's wrong with removing the jargon from stock trading? Because you're removing all specificity from it at the same time. If you show me that screenshot

> What's wrong with removing the jargon from stock trading? Because you're removing all specificity from it at the same time. If you show me that screenshot without the text in the tweet, I'd have no idea what action it actually refers to. It could mean you're buying or selling an option. Or it could mean you're buying or selling a stock (potentially short selling). It could even mean you're buying stock on margin. In fact, buying a call option is probably not even the most reasonable interpretation of "I think that this stock will go up", because purchasing the stock outright would be the default workflow. Especially since it doesn't even specify a timeline for the option[0]! Am I betting that it will go up today? Next week? Next month? Next year? There is literally no way to tell from that display. And quite honestly: if you know about the distinction between buying equity and buying a call option, you will care about the difference between the two. And if you don't know about the distinction, you have no business trading options, because you'll undoubtedly screw yourself over. [0] Timelines matter less than you'd think, because you can sell an option early to recoup its value and call options are always worth more alive than dead[1]. But it still matters, because buying an option that expires in a month is a very different bet from buying an option that expires in a year. [1] In other words, you never exercise an option early even in markets where it's permitted.

perl4ever 9y ago
I thought when you were approved for option trading you had to read and at least claim you understood "the Characteristics & Risks of Standardized Options". I didn't even know it was legal to simplify things to this extent.
- perl4ever 9y ago
  I looked at the Robin Hood link posted elsewhere in this thread, and it links to "the Characteristics & Risks of Standardized Options" but it presents it as optional. Elsewhere[1] it is stated "Prior to buying or selling an option, investors must read a copy" (emphasis mine). Of course, after reading it you should be sure you understand it, but that's probably hopeless... [1]https://www.theocc.com/about/publications/character-risks.jsp https://www.theocc.com/about/publications/character-risks.js...
truthteller11 9y ago
So much BS in your post and most of everyone ("elitist") here. If someone came here say this kind of thing about programming they would be voted to hell. ie. If you do not know how pointers work you have no busines programming because you'll undoubtedly screw your app.
- existencebox 9y ago
  I don't think your analogy holds water, if only from the fact that "pass by reference vs value" is rooted in pointer knowledge, and is rather key to "not screwing up your app." (And as sister posts pointed out, messing up an app usually does not put ones finances on the line) I also disagree with the core thrust of your post, but that's subjective so I'm listing this second. As someone who went from "financially clueless" to trading options over the last few years, I got to see my own mistakes firsthand, which were at least initially rooted in not understanding the implications of various vehicles and the patterns by which to use them, and that was even after quite a bit of time practicing in simulators. No, I absolutely agree with the parent that there's a risk to not only trying to spoon-feed gambling (which is honestly how I see options, take it or leave it) under the guise of investing to uninformed consumers, but in splitting the jargon so a new entrant can't even easily bootstrap their knowledge by looking up the terms. (I find it additionally funny to be arguing this, as I'm normally a staunch opponent to the Accredited Investor laws, but there's definitely a continuum between "keep poor people from using these vehicles" and "everyone and their grandmother can now shoot themselves in the foot without the most base validation that they know what they're getting into or have the tools to do so with eyes open")
  - truthteller11 9y ago
    > so a new entrant can't even easily bootstrap their knowledge This is where the pointer analogy works. You don't need to use, but by knowing what a f pointer is, you increase your knowledge about the domain as you've put, by knowing the difference of "pass by reference vs value". And messing up an app does not put "owns" finances at risks. But may put others by tons of different ways of bad written software (if released or used anyway). So you have more responsibility with software because it MAY affect others and not just yourself blowing your own money.
kgwgk 9y ago
It’s optimal to exercise options in some circumstances (deep in-the-money puts and sometimes calls before ex-dividend dates).
- chimeracoder 9y ago
  > It’s optimal to exercise options in some circumstances (deep in-the-money puts and sometimes calls before ex-dividend dates). I was referring specifically to call options; I guess that wasn't clear. You're right, there are occasionally circumstances under which a person might want to exercise a call option ahead-of-time, but as a general rule, it's sub-optimal.

perl4ever 9y ago

I thought when you were approved for option trading you had to read and at least claim you understood "the Characteristics & Risks of Standardized Options". I didn't even know it was legal to simplify things to this extent.

perl4ever 9y ago
I looked at the Robin Hood link posted elsewhere in this thread, and it links to "the Characteristics & Risks of Standardized Options" but it presents it as optional. Elsewhere[1] it is stated "Prior to buying or selling an option, investors must read a copy" (emphasis mine). Of course, after reading it you should be sure you understand it, but that's probably hopeless... [1]https://www.theocc.com/about/publications/character-risks.jsp https://www.theocc.com/about/publications/character-risks.js...

truthteller11 9y ago

So much BS in your post and most of everyone ("elitist") here. If someone came here say this kind of thing about programming they would be voted to hell. ie. If you do not know how pointers work you have no busines programming because you'll undoubtedly screw your app.

existencebox 9y ago
I don't think your analogy holds water, if only from the fact that "pass by reference vs value" is rooted in pointer knowledge, and is rather key to "not screwing up your app." (And as sister posts pointed out, messing up an app usually does not put ones finances on the line) I also disagree with the core thrust of your post, but that's subjective so I'm listing this second. As someone who went from "financially clueless" to trading options over the last few years, I got to see my own mistakes firsthand, which were at least initially rooted in not understanding the implications of various vehicles and the patterns by which to use them, and that was even after quite a bit of time practicing in simulators. No, I absolutely agree with the parent that there's a risk to not only trying to spoon-feed gambling (which is honestly how I see options, take it or leave it) under the guise of investing to uninformed consumers, but in splitting the jargon so a new entrant can't even easily bootstrap their knowledge by looking up the terms. (I find it additionally funny to be arguing this, as I'm normally a staunch opponent to the Accredited Investor laws, but there's definitely a continuum between "keep poor people from using these vehicles" and "everyone and their grandmother can now shoot themselves in the foot without the most base validation that they know what they're getting into or have the tools to do so with eyes open")
- truthteller11 9y ago
  > so a new entrant can't even easily bootstrap their knowledge This is where the pointer analogy works. You don't need to use, but by knowing what a f pointer is, you increase your knowledge about the domain as you've put, by knowing the difference of "pass by reference vs value". And messing up an app does not put "owns" finances at risks. But may put others by tons of different ways of bad written software (if released or used anyway). So you have more responsibility with software because it MAY affect others and not just yourself blowing your own money.

kgwgk 9y ago

It’s optimal to exercise options in some circumstances (deep in-the-money puts and sometimes calls before ex-dividend dates).

chimeracoder 9y ago
> It’s optimal to exercise options in some circumstances (deep in-the-money puts and sometimes calls before ex-dividend dates). I was referring specifically to call options; I guess that wasn't clear. You're right, there are occasionally circumstances under which a person might want to exercise a call option ahead-of-time, but as a general rule, it's sub-optimal.