someone else mentioned how their blood pressure spikes from using microsoft products...
The sheer anger that I feel over how fuckingly stupid it is that they named everything copilot that basic conversation is difficult... I tried going to the article and got swarmed by paywall, finally checked the archive link and I think you're right.
OP here: I wish that were the case, however we're targetting old school businesses who unfortunately in my experience get weirded out by .io style domains
Because the size of the market was/is so small that you're actually able to corner it. Oil or Treasury futures are far too big that no single person could ever corner it.
> Treasury futures are far too big that no single person could ever corner it.
Well, you'd think, but squeezing the CTD bond was completely accepted practice well into the noughties until PIMCO flew too close to the sun and faced regulatory wrath.
The point is that it's silly that the law is specific to onions, and the explanation "it's because onion market was small enough to be cornered" is unsatisfactory because there are other small markets too
Just like solving math or programming in a general sense is much harder than a specific solution , so is passing a broader law.
We don’t complain about switch cases in code when there is two or three switches we start refactoring once it starts to proliferate.
The law is no different , passing a wider ban would not get the votes easily or quickly and the interested parties the onion industry have no reason to push for it neither does the lawmaker acting on their interests.
If said small markets also had exceptions passed seeing the onion one there could have been case to be broad.
It would premature optimization to otherwise, based on just need for elegance , code or law has to work first even if dirty .
Because that was 1985, and this is now. Entire supply chains, input costs, planning, etc. have been built around the assumption of the JPY trading in some sort of range.
Of course that will change over time, if it hasn't already. The Japanese government's messaging about this has been that they're not really worried about the currency weakening (after all they're massive net exporters! it should be a good thing), but rather the speed at which it's happening.
Many don't though, and even if they all did, you can't hedge forever. Hedges are also rolling, so as some hedges expire the companies need to set up new hedges, which are at a worse FX rate. So the hedges lessen the impact but they aren't perfect, otherwise they would not be called 'hedges'.
Use TextVerified, load up like $5 of credit and OAI verification is like $1.00. Then when your account is made, ensure 2FA/passkey is setup then you don't need to worry about the phone number.
As someone who's very well informed on that corner of financial markets.. you're absolutely right. 66bn might cause some minor moves in yields but it's far from a disaster.
US 10y bond auctions are often >40bn in size, with shorter maturities well over that. The seller of this debt (China) wouldn't want to smash the market because they'd only be shooting themselves in the foot.
Point being that it's an easily digestible amount of debt.
As someone who's very well informed on that corner of financial markets, you probably realize that China controls much more than $660 billion of US Treasury securities.
I'm sure you also realize that when a large holder sells a significant stake of any asset, traders anticipate they will sell more in the future.
Example 1: Berkshire Hathaway selling $47 million of BYD and the market price dropping 8% the next day, wiping out $10 billion of market value.
Example 2: Musk selling 0.6% of his stake in Tesla, and the market price dropping 15% the next day, wiping out $187 billion in market value.
Example 3: UK government announcing a planned sale of 0.3% of above-ground gold, and the global gold price plunging 10% before the first auction.
> As someone who's very well informed on that corner of financial markets, you probably realize that China controls much more than $660 billion of US Treasury securities.
How much do they control? Please cite your sources.
I can find some information about "shadow holdings" (exciting!) held in Luxembourg and Belgium [0] but I cannot imagine those treasuries would add up to a multiple of what's officially on the books and held by the Chinese government and Chinese companies. Interesting thought, though.
Maybe the tinfoil hat is also getting a little tight, but something like this is a giant repository of internal cybersec data being put into one place. The model will see what people are fixing and anyone peering in can make an educated guess on how long that vulnerability may continue existing because people don't update when they should - the alphabet boys wouldn't be able to keep their hand out of the cookie jar.
reply