> Can we really knock the founders of Robinhood for making stock trading so seamless and addictive and amping up the gamification to its highest level. Yes and

> Can we really knock the founders of Robinhood for making stock trading so seamless and addictive and amping up the gamification to its highest level. Yes and no. Yes, because they absolutely know what they are doing and the human cost of it. You don't get this successful with your product without also seeing primary evidence of the negative effects (lives you've ruined). But also no, because there has to be a baseline of personal responsibility on the part of someone who chooses to take on financial risk by betting on the stock markets. This is a cat that doesn't go back in the bag, but I think the way to think about Robinhood isn't as an evolution of stock trading, but as straight up gambling, because that's what Robinhood is. It's giving you an easy way to bet money in a high risk environment where the "house" has a massive institutional and informational advantage, and it's gamified. Without knowing more about Robinhood, I think the first question to ask is "what are the biggest footguns that are catching people who don't know better?"