bonemachine

12 ms·

61.
by bonemachine 13y ago
It's sad for sure that a few really cool documents were lost, but they needed to be destroyed to remove the mold threat. The "mold threat" argument is so utterly vacuous -- it's hard to imagine that anyone making it ca
62.
by bonemachine 13y ago
Smells like plausible deniability. The "mold" claim is especially dubious.
63.
by bonemachine 13y ago
Should firms be required to report any suspicious activity found by any team in any location to every regulator that covers them ? Don't know about "any activity, any location", but the SEC's position is that JPM faile
64.
by bonemachine 13y ago
Aw -- you're just being silly when you say that. You know perfectly well that when companies make acquisitions, that they assume both the liabilities along with all the other assets they're acquiring.
65.
by bonemachine 13y ago
[They] sought assurance from the regulators that they would not be held liable if they bought these two firms... Then the regulators fucked them anyway . Not doubting you, but can you provide more substantiation / detail on that asser
66.
by bonemachine 13y ago
Whatever, but that's not what the current legislation says. Which JPM agreed to be in compliance with in order to be granted a license to go out and do this "banking" thing.
67.
by bonemachine 13y ago
The basically got fined for not doing the SEC's job. No, that's not what they were fined for. They were fined for not doing their job, according to the Bank Secrecy Act. Which they agreed to comply with when they decided to
68.
by bonemachine 13y ago
they were basically fined $13B for acquiring WaMu and Bear Sterns in the financial crisis. Ugh. They were fined for selling bad mortgage bonds. Not for acquiring Bear and WaMu. It also ends up being closer to $5B due to tax breaks and o
69.
by bonemachine 13y ago
There is no reason other than visibility and a personal grudge that this is targeted at JPMorgan v. the other banks. This is, at best, very tenuous speculation. The charges against JPM were quite specific, related to violations of the Ban
70.
by bonemachine 13y ago
If they really though there was fraud, The issue at hand (and for which JPMorgan was fined) wasn't whether they definitively knew, or "thought" there was a fraud or not. It was for specific violations of the Bank Secrecy A
71.
by bonemachine 13y ago
JPM reported Madoff to the SEC in the 90's. They also reported him to the British banking authorities much more recently. Also: the actions for which JPM was recently fined concern primarily the years 2007 and 2008. JPM may have ac
72.
by bonemachine 13y ago
So, you think the punishment should fit the revenue rather than the crime? It should be whatever the law says it should be. In an ideal world... it should be in proportion to the pain and suffering caused by JPM's "willfully&quo
73.
by bonemachine 13y ago
Quoting from them article: JPMorgan, having served as Mr. Madoff’s primary bank for more than two decades, had a unique window into his scheme. In a document outlining the bank’s wrongdoing, prosecutors argued that “the Madoff Ponzi scheme
74.
JPMorgan Settles With Federal Authorities in Madoff Case(dealbook.nytimes.com)
1 points by bonemachine 13y ago|1 comments
75.
by bonemachine 13y ago
But if they post clearly defined limits and penalties, then that brings them into the territory of offering a "terms of service" for which they can potentially be sued. So on many levels, keeping it vague and saying simply, in so
76.
by bonemachine 13y ago
That pretty much answers the question then -- if a business isn't viable enough to hire someone to keep the wheels turning, then it probably just isn't viable. Only other option is to find a way (i.e. roll up your sleeves and do t
77.
by bonemachine 13y ago
"Tweet augmentation." What a job description.
78.
by bonemachine 13y ago
Hire someone?
79.
by bonemachine 13y ago
Glad to see RT so concerned about violations of personal space. Still waiting for them to report on the forced gynecological examinations endured by Pussy Riot members Nadezhda Tolokonnikova and Maria Alyokhina, before their "humane&q
80.
by bonemachine 13y ago
Well, its real, main purpose is to provide a gravy train to its various first-tier stakeholders (elected representatives, and white collar defense contractors). As a side effect, it creates a lot of blue collar jobs, also -- but these are
81.
by bonemachine 13y ago
Yeah, it's basically just a gimmick. When I see "unlimited" PTO mentioned in job ads, I get the sense that someone put it in there because they got the idea (from some medium post or somewhere) that this is what all the other
82.
by bonemachine 13y ago
Yet the past few months have seen stark harbingers of looming pain. Strange notion of "pain", there. Coming from an industry whose main purpose, basically, is to drop fire on people.
83.
by bonemachine 13y ago
I guess they're getting tired of the "leading NoSQL database" tripe. Which, despite its being utterly devoid of meaning (if you understand anything at all about the general database landscape), 10gen just keeps repeating, an
84.
by bonemachine 13y ago
The hell-banning will probably only be temporary (30 to 60 days). And RG didn't just "screw up" by trying to game the system; they were blatantly cocky about it, so that's probably why Google felt they needed to step in
85.
by bonemachine 13y ago
It's a very rough sample with considerable selection bias, of course. But it's the kind of data that's (essentially) never reported in a centralized way and on a global scale, otherwise.
86.
by bonemachine 13y ago
This is solid logic; if the free market can do anything, Whether it can in principle, versus whether it does in reality are of course two very different things.
87.
by bonemachine 13y ago
TL;DR Nice, planet-saving thoughts and all, if the original author could put a bit of markup around the key takeaway points. For example the following: The main thesis is that it may be possible to apply science and technology to unders
88.
by bonemachine 13y ago
Fixed. Thanks.
89.
by bonemachine 13y ago
Or simply, "your boss." Gets right to the point.
90.
Planet likely to warm by 4C by 2100, scientists warn(theguardian.com)
2 points by bonemachine 13y ago|0 comments

More ›