shahmeern

Script to check if you've been pwnd if anyone needs it (or just ask an llm to make one for you): https://gist.github.com/shamwow/93101381686f23d21a85da4bac5b...

I don't think that line of reasoning has worked our particularly well for shelter.

Yeah this is the downstream effect I had in mind. You could say we'd increase supply to meet the demand but that hasn't really worked out with housing for example

Does UBI really solve the problem, wouldn’t it just make everything more expensive?

what exactly were you appalled at?

I dont think the author is really proposing a solution. They're just proposing that anxiety and ambition are orthogonal

Disclaimer: I used to work at robinhood

The consolidated bid and the ask across all exchanges make up what's called the NBBO and every one (market makers, exchanges, etc) are required to give you a price equal to or better than the NBBO. So if the bid for SHOP is say $50.00, the ask is $50.10, and you are selling SHOP, its illegal for anyone to give you a price < $50.

Market makers make money by buying low and selling high (and vice versa). They typically look for small movements not large ones. So if a market maker bought SHOP at $50, they would try to sell it at $50.10. This is what everyone means when they say a market maker makes money off the spread.

This strategy works really well when you have large random order flow, which is why market makers want to pay brokerages for order flow. They incentivize brokerages, even ones that charge commission) by giving pfof (payment for order flow) and price improvement on top of the NBBO. This price improvement is passed on directly to the customer.

IIRC, brokerages have a best execution obligation. So they are required to try and execute orders in a way that gets customers the best prices. I don't know about other brokerages but at Robinhood, pfof wouldn't go into our order routing decision at all. We would send orders to the market maker using a model which only considered the historical price improvement they gave our customers.

Because Robinhood order flow is so lucrative for marker makers in aggregate, they were willing to give us really good price improvement. So the execution for options and equity orders at Robinhood be better than other brokerages (even ones you pay commission for)

That's fair but calling it a fee is disingenuous, especially considering your contrived scenario of buying and then immediately selling

I’m surprised and sad that UST blew up before tether

To avoid delays with traditional money rails. Most usage is for DeFi (you’d prbly call it gambling) but I also know people who use it for remittances. Believe it or not, sending stablecoins internationally and off ramping at a foreign bank acc is faster / cheaper than using something like western union

There are other reasons why having stablecoins is useful.

Regular money can’t be transferred digitally. If you want to send money to someone, both your bank and their bank need to speak the same protocol. This isn’t an issue usually but try sending a large transfer (>100k) or sending money internationally.

Stablecoins have the protocol built into it. Just by using a stablecoin, you are able to receive and send the coins digitally to anyone else who uses them.

Please stop spreading misinformation.

There are two prices, the bid price (how much someone is willing to pay) and an ask price (how much someone is willing to sell). When you submit a market order, you usually get a price close to the bid (if you’re selling) or the ask (if you’re buying).

The 20$ difference you describe is the spread - not a fee taken by the brokerage, market maker, exchange. Whoever is executing your trade isn’t pocketing the 20$.

Huge fan of safety razors. At least for me, razors with multiple blades would tug on my hair too much and cause ingrown hairs often (I think those two are casual)

Plus, nothing wakes you up in morning like potentially cutting yourself

I don’t think solved is the right word. You can build apps using ionic/electron but native apps are objectively better

I feel like, as with a lot of tools, graphql is really useful if you’re at the scale of having 1000s of different object types. If you’re only dealing with a handful of resources, a simple rest api is way less headache.

Not all APIs are about reading and writing data though. You might want an api to create a db entry but also kick off an async task.

Not all clients are written in js (android, iOS). For mobile apps, you’re better off having most logic exist on the backend

I actually prefer it when sites have zoom disabled on mobile. It's very jarring having the entire viewport zoom in on input elements on focus.

There's a subjective balance to be struck between implicitness and explicitness. The example DHH gives are basically default parameters, which is a pretty reasonable amount of implicitness for me.

On the other end of the spectrum are things like Scala's implicit parameters, which I abhor.

I think that enjoying working in a framework/library is very much a function of how familiar one is with the framework/library.

It might be worth giving React that 3rd try.