Hacker News .hnnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | le_didil's commentslogin

great classic !! I didn't know it was still maintained, thanks beej !


If you've enjoyed The Wire, do read David Simon's books, it's outstanding work:

- Homicide: A Year on the Killing Streets

- The Corner: A Year in the Life of an Inner-City Neighborhood


The Corner is done as HBO show as well, with many actors seen in The Wire.


Both of them have also been made into TV miniseries.


the books are way better than the series imho


I haven't read the Corner but the Homicide book was definitely much richer than the series. As could be expected from a book vs tv show the book contains a lot more reflection and introspection.


Deadwood: The Movie


Holy s* this completely flew under my radar. Thanks, I loved that TV show!


that's a good point, when playing a bit with rust last year I found that the libraries that deal with "async stuff" (like http clients, db clients etc) are mostly split, some use tokio and some use async-std, and they were incompatible. Not sure if the situation has improved now but it looked like an ecosystem split at the time.


Work is in progress, but the situation hasn't improved yet for end users.


didn't the customers notice that they were given bad execution prices ? or would that be very hard to notice in practice ? (I'm not a trading expert obviously)


You'd only typically lose cents (if that; often enough you don't lose anything) per share. And there's no easy way to validate the price is "fair," since share prices are so fluid.

It's also a fairly victimless crime, as the article notes (although it downplays this); in practice, it seems users typically saved more money thanks to Robinhood's zero-fee trading than they lost in less optimal pricing for their trades. The problem here wasn't that payment-for-order-flow is bad — even Schwab does it for their zero-fee trading platform, and in practice it's often a good tradeoff — the problem is Robinhood lied about it.


And the fact that RH kept a far larger portion of the price improvement as their kickback. As the article mentions, the standard brokerage cut is 20% from the price improvement.

RH demanded 80% of it for themselves. Sure, their customers still got a better price than available in the lit exchange(s) but they were bilked by the 4x hidden commission.


Only place limit orders. If you place a market order you will absolutely get a bad execution price on Robinhood.


To add to this, the swing is really wild. I’ve been tinkering with crypto trades manually through the app to get a hang for it, and limit orders still only tend to go through after you’re a few cents away from the market price, but if you naively do a market buy it will be 50-60 cents off in the wrong direction.


You're taking instead of making with a market order, the fees are higher and the execution is worse.


You’re crossing the spread


aha i see. thanks


I immediately noticed when I switched brokers how much better the prices were, even on limit orders. When I used Robinhood I was 19 years old with no way to know better, aka their dream client


Could you clarify what you mean by better - do you get a smaller spread?


For a buy scenario. If a stock is trading at $20, other brokerages would execute a market order at $19.9997/share where Robinhood would execute a market order at $20.09/share. I noticed this also would occur but less noticeable on limit orders


If the nbbo offer was truly $20 at the time of order execution, there's no way you could get filled at $20.09.


But when funding dries up for startups and companies have to shutter, then all of their digital operation overseas is cut loose. And the people who lose their jobs go into cybercrime. They think, “There's no other options for me. So sure. Let's do it. Lock and load.”

this section is just nonsense. So the crisis happens then devs in "developing countries" become cybercriminals ? total bs ...


Are you telling me you've never gone and downloaded a car after getting laid off?


I don't think this is going to happen. Hotwire-like technologies have existed for a long time with turbo-links, adoption is low and it's very unpractical to work with compared to a split backend api + frontend (framework or not as you prefer).


>it's very unpractical to work with compared to a split backend api + frontend

This is just demonstrably false. Both paradigms have areas where they shine. One or the other is not better across the board.

I guess the point of Hotwire is that there isn't pretty much anything you can't do with the "old tech" that you can with the modern javascript CF.


the docker whale


Whaley McWhaleface


I was thinking “yo mama”


Manna ?


That's what I thought of as well. I first read this short story a very long time ago and it's still something I think of often. For those who aren't acquainted, I think it's worth a read: https://marshallbrain.com/manna1


> There was the facade of “free elections,” but only candidates supported by the rich could ever get on the ballot. The government was completely controlled by the rich, as were the robotic security forces, the military and the intelligence organizations. American democracy had morphed into a third world dictatorship ruled by the wealthy elite.

Fact or fiction?


I think Netlify's success has got nothing to do with "microservices". The new (not so new now actually) trend that allowed it to prosper is when people started splitting up backend-rendered webapps (where the backend was effectively rendering most of the html, classic mvc/rails style) into a static frontend/single page app making api calls to an api backend (or multiple but it doesn't really matter here)


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: