Readit News logoReadit News
electrograv commented on Margin debt surges to record high   advisorperspectives.com/d... · Posted by u/pera
827a · 3 days ago
Yeah its important to decompose those two sources (among others) of "money printing". The obvious one people think most about is when our federal government does it. But a more concerning one is: Enforced banking reserve ratios. If a bank holds a trillion dollars in assets and is allowed to hold a reserve ratio of 10%, they can print $10T out of thin air, because they're allowed to issue debt up to that amount.

As far as I'm aware, in 2020 the reserve requirement in the US was set to 0%, and it has not been changed since then.

electrograv · 3 days ago
Yes, but with the “revolving door” between private financial institutions and government financial policy/regulation, there’s little real distinction anymore between the two.

Those private banks can print that money out of thin air because government allows them to. And the government officials (many formerly financial executives) allow them to because they “have to” to prevent “disastrous” private banking/financial collapse.

But if you or I wanted to play the same games to print our own money they way they do? No, that would be wrong and dangerous and illegal!

So it’s pretty clear that both government and private financial institutions are tightly coupled partners in a mostly corrupt, intentionally obfuscated shell game that primarily serves to keep money and power steadily flowing into the hands of the already wealthy and powerful.

Just look at who is actually held accountable for financial crimes. Some individual trader that finds and exploits some glitch that allows them to profit from the wealthy? Straight to jail. High ranking institutional powers (government and private) that implement often illegal schemes that continuously siphon wealth from common people into their hands? Slap on the wrist at most.

electrograv commented on Margin debt surges to record high   advisorperspectives.com/d... · Posted by u/pera
marcosdumay · 3 days ago
> I have a vague theory that as the amount of wealth inequality in increases in a system along with excess money printing (lending, hypothecation, etc where the wealthy are permitted privileged leverage and risk), the more detached markets become from reality in general.

If you want to make it less vague, you can read Keynes.

It's inequality that is the important one, money printing doesn't impact it (except for it impacting inequality). In simple language, people don't want to spend all their money on consumption (the "demand is infinite" you see on econ101 is an approximation), and so when only two dozen people have all the money there aren't many things you can sell and turn a profit. But those people still want to invest all the money they aren't using, there is just nothing to invest into.

At the turn of the 19th to the 20th century, explaining this was a huge open problem in economics.

electrograv · 3 days ago
I had no idea Keynes had similar ideas, so I definitely should read his work (and economics literature in general).

I probably should generalize my thoughts though to say “expectation of economic growth” (instead of just “money printing”) seems to me necessary to yield “opaque market insanity”, as opposed to “transparent evil sanity”.

As a thought experiment, consider a (practically impossible) scenario where there is universally no expectation for long-term economic growth/contraction — regardless of whether it’s “real” or just monetary. Then by definition, a long term market simply cannot exist at all. No amount of wealth inequality can cause market insanity if there is no (long-term) market at all.

Wealth inequality in such a situation can still yield hoarding, domination, conquest, control, scams, manipulations, etc. But I wouldn’t call that “market insanity” so much as “evil sanity”.

In practice, the real impact of wealth inequality on the common people would likely be the same either way. However, without long term economic growth/inflation, the “sane evil” of the greedy wealth can no longer hide behind the veil of “market insanity”.

electrograv commented on Margin debt surges to record high   advisorperspectives.com/d... · Posted by u/pera
jjice · 3 days ago
I'm sure trading on margin is for some reason actually a positive concept for the economy at large for reasons I can't understand, but god damn does it feel like a bad idea to see huge spikes of debt to prop up what already feels like an absurdly out of balance market.

I don't know how to actually tell if the market is overvalued, but man when I see Palantir has a PE of like 500, Tesla almost 200, and Apple is like 35, I can't help but think there too much hype.

But I have literally no idea. Macroeconomics is way out of my wheelhouse, and I'm usually wrong.

Here's to an index fund...

electrograv · 3 days ago
The thing is, you can simultaneously be completely correct about the market being insane, while also entirely wrong in expecting it to behave in a sane way.

Cue the famous quote: “The market can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent.”

I have a vague theory that as the amount of wealth inequality increases in a system along with “money printing” (lending, hypothecation, etc where the wealthy are permitted privileged leverage and risk), the more detached markets become from reality in general. In such a case, an increasing majority of the money circulating has no need to be grounded in anything close to the common basic needs and values that most normal people have to live with.

Instead, most important to such wealth is to tap into the source of inflation to be on the winning side of that. This becomes a game of its own, where an investment’s connection to reality or fundamental value is mostly irrelevant compared to how it leverages or monopolizes the state-created and privately created instruments of “money printing” (sketchy lending, rehypothecation, etc.) and other such “games” that only the wealthy are allowed in on.

electrograv commented on I don't think AGI is right around the corner   dwarkesh.com/p/timelines-... · Posted by u/mooreds
babymetal · 2 months ago
I've been confused with the AI discourse for a few years, because it seems to make assertions with strong philosophical implications for the relatively recent (Western) philosophical conversation around personal identity and consciousness.

I no longer think that this is really about what we immediately observe as our individual intellectual existence, and I don't want to criticize whatever it is these folks are talking about.

But FWIW, and in that vein, if we're really talking about artificial intelligence, i.e. "creative" and "spontaneous" thought, that we all as introspective thinkers can immediately observe, here are references I take seriously (Bernard Williams and John Searle from the 20th century):

https://archive.org/details/problemsofselfph0000will/page/n7...

https://archive.org/details/intentionalityes0000sear

Descartes, Hume, Kant and Wittgenstein are older sources that are relevant.

[edit] Clarified that Williams and Searle are 20th century.

electrograv · 2 months ago
Intelligence and consciousness are two different things though, and some would argue they may even be almost completely orthogonal. (A great science fiction book called Blindsight by Peter Watts explores this concept in some detail BTW, it’s a great read.)
electrograv commented on Writing into Uninitialized Buffers in Rust   blog.sunfishcode.online/w... · Posted by u/luu
90s_dev · 3 months ago
Write into uninit'd buffers was one of the pain points of Rust for the creator of the new open source "edit" program for Windows[1]. I wonder what he thinks of this article.

> Another thing is the difficulty of using uninitialized data in Rust. I do understand that this involves an attribute in clang which can then perform quite drastic optimizations based on it, but this makes my life as a programmer kind of difficult at times. When it comes to `MaybeUninit`, or the previous `mem::uninit()`, I feel like the complexity of compiler engineering is leaking into the programming language itself and I'd like to be shielded from that if possible. At the end of the day, what I'd love to do is declare an array in Rust, assign it no value, `read()` into it, and magically reading from said array is safe. That's roughly how it works in C, and I know that it's also UB there if you do it wrong, but one thing is different: It doesn't really ever occupy my mind as a problem. In Rust it does. [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44036021]

electrograv · 3 months ago
> That's roughly how it works in C, and I know that it's also UB there if you do it wrong, but one thing is different: It doesn't really ever occupy my mind as a problem. In Rust it does.

UB doesn’t occupy the author’s mind when writing C, when it really should. This kind of lazy attitude to memory safety is precisely why so much C code is notoriously riddled with memory bugs and security vulnerabilities.

electrograv commented on MacBook Air M4   apple.com/macbook-air/... · Posted by u/tosh
senordevnyc · 6 months ago
It's not about whether people can perceive the difference. They don't care.
electrograv · 6 months ago
That’s why I specifically emphasized “perception and preferences”. Believe it or not, the science covers both - both what people can perceive, and what people care about and value.
electrograv commented on MacBook Air M4   apple.com/macbook-air/... · Posted by u/tosh
olyjohn · 6 months ago
You don't buy a PC and try to run MacOS on it do you? Then why do people keep buying random laptops and then complaining when Linux doesn't run on it? You buy a laptop from a vendor who designs them to run Linux out of the box.

Also, Apple's power management isn't flawless either. It used to be fantastic, but I've never, ever seen a laptop that has to charge for 15 minutes before you can even boot it from a flat battery. This seems to happen if I leave my laptop powered off for more than a few days. Like, turned completely off, not sleeping with the lid shut.

electrograv · 6 months ago
> Then why do people keep buying random laptops and then complaining when Linux doesn't run on it? You buy a laptop from a vendor who designs them to run Linux out of the box.

Because:

(1) Laptop models designed to run Linux out of the box are very scarce, with very few options to choose from.

(2) Of the few that do exist, I’ve never seen any even remotely close to being competitive with Apple’s laptops (in terms of hardware quality, and good performance with excellent power efficiency / fanless / thermals / battery life).

Part of that is due to Apple’s monopoly on the superiority of their M series chips. But the rest I assume comes from less R&D investment generally in the Linux laptop space due to it being such a small niche, unfortunately.

electrograv commented on MacBook Air M4   apple.com/macbook-air/... · Posted by u/tosh
whynotminot · 6 months ago
This is why I led with this part, unrelated to my own perception:

> Have never heard anyone in my life that isn’t an engineer comment on Pro Motion. Not even in an accidental sort of “hmmm why does my phone just feel faster” kind of way.

I would also argue the crowd that insists everyone needs Pro Motion is doing exactly what you accuse me of -- assuming their needs and perception must also be everyone else's. When clearly the market has said otherwise, given Apple's success for many, many years with 60Hz screens.

electrograv · 6 months ago
> I would also argue the crowd that insists everyone needs Pro Motion is doing exactly what you accuse me of -- assuming their needs and perception must also be everyone else's.

I am not seeing this alleged crowd of people insisting that everyone needs 120hz/ProMotion. This seems to be a red herring.

I am seeing a crowd of people (including myself) saying that we experience 120hz/ProMotion as a huge improvement over 60hz, so much so that we will never buy a product without this ever again (so long as we have the choice).

I furthermore claim that while not everyone is a member of this crowd (obviously), it represents a sufficiently large share of the device-buying population to justify steering billions of dollars of hardware and software industry to support this, which evidently has happened and increasingly continues to happen.

If this crowd were an insignificant minority as you seem to imply, then 120hz displays would be a fad that fades away in all but the most niche markets (e.g. pro gaming), and yet we’re seeing precisely the opposite happen — 120hz displays are growing in popularity by expanding broadly into increasingly non-niche consumer device products everywhere, from laptops to tablets to phones.

> When clearly the market has said otherwise, given Apple's success for many, many years with 60Hz screens.

Arguing that the market doesn’t want/need it now because Apple succeeded without it in the past, is completely absurd — just as nonsensical as trying to argue that computers don’t ever need any more memory because they sold just fine with less in the past.

electrograv commented on MacBook Air M4   apple.com/macbook-air/... · Posted by u/tosh
whynotminot · 6 months ago
Have never heard anyone in my life that isn’t an engineer comment on Pro Motion. Not even in an accidental sort of “hmmm why does my phone just feel faster” kind of way.

This is a feature that really only matters to the Hacker News crowd, and Apple is very aware of that. They invest their BOM into things the majority of people care about. And they do have the Pro Motion screens for the few that do.

Even I — an engineer - regularly move between my Pro Motion enabled iPhone and my regular 60Hz iPad and while I notice it a little, I really just don’t see why this is the one hill people choose to die on.

electrograv · 6 months ago
You have to understand that your own perceptual experience is not identical to that of all other humans. Without recognizing that, we will inevitably end up talking past each other endlessly and writing each other off as { hallucinating, lying, exaggerating, etc } for one of us claiming to perceive something important that the other does not.

It would be no different than arguing about whether we need all three primary colors (red, green, blue) with someone who is colorblind (and unaware of this). Or like arguing whether speakers benefit from being able to reproduce a certain frequency, with someone who is partially or fully deaf at that frequency. And I truly mean no disrespect to anyone with different perception abilities in these or any other domains.

Recognizing that large differences exist here is essential to make sense of the reality - that something that seems completely unimportant or barely noticeable to you, could actually be a hugely obvious and important difference to many others (whether it’s a certain screen refresh rate, the presence of a primary color you cannot perceive but others can, an audio frequency you cannot hear but others can, or otherwise).

electrograv commented on MacBook Air M4   apple.com/macbook-air/... · Posted by u/tosh
VincentEvans · 6 months ago
Lol, reminds me of audiophile discussions when most people listen to youtube streaming a recompressed version of an mp3 someone uploaded.
electrograv · 6 months ago
It’s deeply flawed logic at best (or an intentional red herring at worst) to cite the existence of pseudoscience discussed elsewhere, as an argument against real science being discussed here.

There is a well-understood science to both auditory and visual perception, even more concretely so for the visual side. The scientific literature on human perception in both categories is actively used in the engineering of almost every modern (audible/visual) device you use every day (both in hardware design, and software such as the design of lossy compression algorithms). We have very precise scientific understanding of the limits (and individual variation) of human visual and (to a slightly lesser extent) auditory perception and preferences.

u/electrograv

KarmaCake day2911May 3, 2012View Original