Re:$444B 'Fat Finger' Trade Crashed Stocks.Now Citigroup Is ...
by throwaway1105q on Tuesday May 28, 2024 @05:35PM
(#40505870)
My point was that 2 is really not enough to end the world. Damn their money, it's their problem. Launching nukes should require 200, not 2.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:$444B 'Fat Finger' Trade Crashed Stocks.Now Citigroup Is ...
by Arnt on Wednesday May 29, 2024 @05:07AM
(#40509948)
Suppose it actually required twenty, or 200. In that case, would the relevant organisation publish the truth or rather lie and say "two"? I think lying makes a lot of sense. Telling the truth would be like saying "go ahead and kill the most accessible of these 20/200 people".
So I don't think the "2" is very likely to be true.
Re:$444B 'Fat Finger' Trade Crashed Stocks.Now Citigroup Is ...
by throwaway1105q on Wednesday May 29, 2024 @05:36AM
(#40510123)
It could be 200 out of 20k, or something like that. Though yes, you're right, lying makes sense.
Re:$444B 'Fat Finger' Trade Crashed Stocks.Now Citigroup Is ...
by appplication on Wednesday May 29, 2024 @09:24AM
(#40511732)
It takes more than two. Two is enough to launch, but other silos have override authority. So if two people went renegade they could still be shut down.