TotallyHuman

joined 2 years ago
[–] TotallyHuman@lemmy.ca 1 points 6 days ago

Granted. "Arbitrarily large" would probably be a better phrasing: if I buy a stock for $100 and the value drops to $0, I'm out $100. Can't lose more money than I put in. What I meant is that short positions, by their nature, don't have this ceiling on the amount of money you lose.

[–] TotallyHuman@lemmy.ca 15 points 1 week ago (3 children)

If EA, having been purchased, is milked for cash, strip-mined for IP, and then unceremoniously abandoned, it will be very funny.

[–] TotallyHuman@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 week ago (2 children)

You can hold a short position by repeatedly borrowing more stock -- but you run the risk of running out of money completely, because short positions have (theoretically) infinite downside risk.

[–] TotallyHuman@lemmy.ca 14 points 1 week ago

If you imagine it like making a bet, nobody's going to take a bet with you where they pay you when it pops, but there's no time after which you pay them -- because they'd never get any money out of that bet. Buying stock is different because it's a thing you can own, but you can't invest in the idea of something failing, because there isn't any business which will take your money and make something more likely to fail.

You could buy every stock except AI-related stocks, which I believe is functionally equivalent to buying an index fund and shorting AI stocks based on the percentage of AI stocks in the index fund. You could also think about what businesses would do well (or less poorly) in the case of an AI-instigated crash, and then buy those.

[–] TotallyHuman@lemmy.ca 7 points 3 weeks ago

Bill Clinton should deny it. Publicly state "I did not have sexual relations with that man", and take no questions.

[–] TotallyHuman@lemmy.ca 8 points 2 months ago

I just want to take a moment to enjoy that the Canada Post thing is one of our country's big political conversations. There's a problem, and people have different solutions. Some of the solutions rely on false information or bad reasoning. Some of them are well-reasoned, but have different priorities to each other. The government will have to make a decision, and some will praise it, and some will criticize it, and it will make some peoples' lives better, and some peoples' lives worse.

But nobody's using the Canada Post situation as a vehicle to hurt people they hate. People don't seem to be moving in lockstep based on ideology and propaganda. Nobody's been called a fascist over it because nobody's been being a fascist over it. This is what politics should be like. It's refreshing.

[–] TotallyHuman@lemmy.ca 5 points 7 months ago

Headlines often change after publication. Everyone's A/B testing these days.