esja

7 ms·

1.
by esja 3y ago
Worth noting Robert Morris's addendum: "Including Common Lisp".
2.
by esja 3y ago
It was Muhammad Ali, after the Rumble in the Jungle against George Foreman in Zaire in 1974. On his return he was asked what he thought of Africa and said “Thank God my granddaddy got on that boat!”
3.
by esja 3y ago
You're right, and it's getting worse, but even in 1962 there were problems: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Image:_A_Guide_to_Pseudo-e... The internet accelerated the decline by 1) destroying media business
4.
by esja 3y ago
Zurich
5.
by esja 3y ago
In my experience the women who make it to these levels are no less domineering than the men, and often more so.
6.
by esja 3y ago
Yes, that’s the big unknown. It’s hard for any sort of anti-establishment populist to emerge. Trump is an example of this: he basically ran against both parties, was rendered ineffective, and they haven’t stopped trying to bury him. Ross Pe
7.
by esja 3y ago
You’re right, it’s not obvious. And perhaps to strengthen your point, countries with compulsory voting (e.g. Australia) don’t seem to show any particular skew. Regarding the original point, Pew published some interesting stats on voter pref
8.
by esja 3y ago
It didn't happen that way either: https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/jul/11/joe-biden/... He initially referred to UV light as a disinfection agent, and then to the "bleach".
9.
by esja 3y ago
He never advocated injecting hydrochloric acid.
10.
by esja 3y ago
Those facts don't support your conclusion. The popular vote is not even close to "a majority of Americans". Something like 120 million American adults didn't even vote in 2016, versus around 66 and 63 million who voted f
11.
by esja 3y ago
It's not wild. It's precisely what they did in 2015, as revealed by WikiLeaks: https://www.salon.com/2016/11/09/the-hillary-clinton-campaig...
12.
by esja 4y ago
There are a lot of cases where a small minority is heavily invested in a topic at the individual level, while the majority (who have an opposing view) are not. The small minority has the incentive, the energy, and the time to keep fighting
13.
by esja 4y ago
Yes, but the SNB and FINMA (and the Federal government) will try many other things before it comes to that.
14.
by esja 4y ago
You could always ask the Financial Stability Board: https://www.fsb.org/2022/11/2022-list-of-global-systemically...
15.
by esja 4y ago
How is that relevant? You said: "It does not have a significant retail presence." Meanwhile, CS does have a massive retail presence, in Switzerland, and has done for 150+ years.
16.
by esja 4y ago
What? CS has a massive retail bank. It’s their most profitable division and has existed for 150+ years.
17.
by esja 4y ago
CS operates in 50+ countries. All the largest entities have resolution/winddown plans agreed with their regulators. In reality they probably won’t be used because the SNB and Fed will fear contagion.
18.
by esja 4y ago
They are a bit less important than they once were in terms of volume, but they are still massively interconnected with the rest of the system. There is zero chance they‘re just left to implode without governments and central banks steppin
19.
by esja 4y ago
Not a chance of a natural implosion. CS is one of a very small number of globally systemically important banks.
20.
by esja 4y ago
"depositors lend their money to a bank, for which they are paid interest, and banks lend that money out" ... isn't how banking actually works. https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/quarterly-bulletin/2014/
21.
by esja 4y ago
It was a real initiative using a real company which specialises in this. They just aren't very good at preserving the intent of the author and the nuance of the text. Which is exactly what we should expect of any censor. https:/&
22.
by esja 4y ago
The prison issue wasn't the only straw but I believe it was the last one. It wasn't just that her government tried to put a male rapist in a female prison, after ignoring years of warnings that self-id would cause this to happen.
23.
by esja 4y ago
I call them complexifiers... because that's their habitual response to problems. I prefer to hire simplifiers (within reason). Some complexifiers are not nearly as smart as they seem - they can often have tunnel vision due to their bri
24.
by esja 4y ago
A lot of mainstream banks felt uncomfortable about getting involved with crypto. But at the tail end of a monetary bubble when everyone is chasing yield, the pressure from your board, your major investors, and your trend-following employees
25.
by esja 4y ago
You're mixing up cause and effect. When you make terrible architectural choices, it leads to the other problems you mention. You can't build a house on quicksand, no matter how well your views are aligned, or how certain you think
26.
by esja 4y ago
All the big banks have projects like these. As soon as the hype fades and the CIOs can stop telling their board "yes we're investing in blockchain", the projects will be cancelled.
27.
by esja 4y ago
I'm mainly referring to the technical leadership.
28.
by esja 4y ago
Bingo. Adverse selection in action... they've created a "market for lemons". All the offshoring and outsourcing (and cultural disdain for technical people) means they can no longer tell the difference between charlatans and g
29.
by esja 4y ago
The picture was always bleak. Cheap money and FOMO just stopped a lot of people seeing it. “Men, it has been well said, think in herds; it will be seen that they go mad in herds, while they only recover their senses slowly, one by one.” - C
30.
by esja 4y ago
Hot off the press: "They were building a Frankenstein’: how ASX’s blockchain unravelled" https://12ft.io/proxy?q=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.afr.com%2Fcompanie... Some people are blaming "tech nerds" for having to

More ›