zie

38 ms·

571.
by zie 3y ago
The difference is, the US govt has backstopped all the bank charlatans and put their money and their citizens money on the line when it comes to USD backstopping. The Binance CEO wouldn't backstop his firm any farther than he can throw
572.
by zie 3y ago
Well, sure the US could decide to nullify the treaty. This would almost certainly be abysmal for Mexico/US relations. Suddenly when the US want's Mexico's help to do something, Mexico will be much less willing. Not to ment
573.
by zie 3y ago
Thanks!
574.
by zie 3y ago
> (excluding two Mexican states that are further down river) The Mexican states/Mexican govt don't need to, they have a treaty with the US govt. The US govt is required to send X amount of water across the border. I forget the
575.
by zie 3y ago
It's a GNU thing :P
576.
by zie 3y ago
You are correct that Make is being abused because it's common. Me, I'm going to keep abusing Make vs bothering to find something supposedly better, that will then inject dependency startup problems I'd rather avoid. Yes, abu
577.
by zie 3y ago
Citadel makes money with PFOF for sure, but it is usually a net good for retail investors. If it wasn't the brokerages wouldn't be allowed to do it: https://www.finra.org/sites/default/files/2021-06
578.
by zie 3y ago
I'm sure reasonable people could debate the timeframe ad-nauseum, but I think most people can agree, Congress in general has never been all that fiscally responsible.
579.
by zie 3y ago
Agreed, hence Congress is full of fiscal idiots. It's not new, Congress has been full of fiscal idiots for well over a decade.
580.
by zie 3y ago
Interest rates affect debt. The higher the interest rate(s) the less debt people are willing to take on. Debt is the lube that keeps the economic wheels spinning. If you can borrow for 5% but can make 20% return on that money, then you ob
581.
by zie 3y ago
I agree, raising taxes would definitely help AND would help the US govt with their currently fiscally idiotic ways. Unfortunately, that would imply Congress has their act together. Since they currently can't even manage to keep from d
582.
by zie 3y ago
Except the US treasury and the Fed gave all US banks a 1yr blank check to get their act together, if rising rates really are causing them trouble. This was during the SVB crash. So no, banks should not fail because of rising rates, if they
583.
by zie 4y ago
I think we are basically in agreement about everything, but coming from different perspectives. There is no "right" answer, but pre-mature optimization is almost always the wrong answer.
584.
by zie 4y ago
Of course subtlety matters, but as you start scaling and noticing pain points, that is when you start working towards fixing them. First you just throw hardware at the problem and that tends to scale really really well for a really long tim
585.
by zie 4y ago
I would argue, you handle the hyper-scale use case when you are actually in hyper-scale. Trying to pre-maturely optimize this is almost always a waste of time and chances are you will screw it up anyway. Almost nobody gets to that scale a
586.
by zie 4y ago
Correct. But for all practical purposes they were lisp machines, you turned them on and got a lisp prompt, not a basic prompt which was the more common language to boot into back then.
587.
by zie 4y ago
We have had lisp machines, but I don't know of any that run e-lisp specifically.
588.
by zie 4y ago
Indeed, sadly that is mostly gone and buried now. Before the phone company was basically completely responsible for keeping your phone working. Now keeping your phone working requires both parties, the vendor and the customer to keep stuff
589.
by zie 4y ago
Sure, but that performance bottle neck is a pittance. On my old x86 MacBook Pro using python, I generated 18B numbers in well under a minute.
590.
by zie 4y ago
When I'm looking for a new book to read, I wander into the local public library and ask the librarian there. I'm rarely dissapointed.
591.
by zie 4y ago
So you take vacation from the previous job I assume?
592.
by zie 4y ago
Bondholders got actually nothing. It's not supposed to work that way. It should be: Equity gets zero, Bondholders get something.
593.
by zie 4y ago
Banks arguably still serve a purpose, but when most risk is externalized by the govt, the incentive for banks is to let the govt take the risk for you, leading to things like SVB. The govt should not take the risk away from being an equity
594.
by zie 4y ago
Exactly.
595.
by zie 4y ago
That's the Bank's problem. They know exactly why everyone is running to MMF's. Banks can fix it whenever they want, by being less greedy. So far they don't seem very motivated. Banks provide us with insurance against our
596.
by zie 4y ago
It doesn't matter. The Fed can choose to make or lose money at their whim. They are wholly unconcerned about losing money right now. They are much more concerned with Inflation, and it's obvious, because that's been a broken
597.
by zie 4y ago
Only for equity holders in the bank, and really with the current lending program from the Fed, they have some breathing room to fix their mess. The question is, will they listen and fix their mess in time. That said, if you are holding mor
598.
by zie 4y ago
I've never found the govt provided API's all that difficult.
599.
by zie 4y ago
I agree with everything, but will push back about everyone having access to everything.. I hope that's mostly read-only or at least a very robust auditing/logging strategy employed. At $WORK, we give basically every employee a DB
600.
by zie 4y ago
I agree the probability is low, but it's clearly not 0, nor will it ever be 0. Is it close enough to 0 as to be not worth worrying about? I don't know the answer to that question but I'd guess it's far enough away from

More ›