Jump to content
NEurope

Rummy

Moderators
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    16,487

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Posts posted by Rummy

  1. Posted

    18 minutes ago, Will said:

    For gambles like this you’re right, but generally the stock market is the only place to have your long term savings. I hold the majority of my money there but in much more stable and valuable companies.

    Ah yeah that's what I'd be about in future when I'm back at a threshold - I agree theres much more increasing economic instability and things like pure cash/money is going to become a bit volatile imo(espesh with the covid and brexit knockons coming etc). Interesting in BTC a bit too - it seems to becoming the new gold of sorts(as it was no doubt intended, too).

    I agree with the meta take - I love that its fucking up the big boys. There's too much wealth inequality as it is and its gaps are being exponentially grown due to these mechanisms. They haven't regulated themselves enough and now nature is taking its own course against it. Was just reading this one about some of the losses of the big bois(of which i expect we see a very small sliver of a picture - this is not a good look for them);

    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/jan/27/gamestop-stocks-us-hedge-fund-pulls-out-after-heavy-losses

  2. Posted

    Yeah - I don't touch the markets because you gotta be careful and again - ONLY go in with money you are 100% HAPPY TO LOSE. Playing beyond your means for the instant kicks and dopamine hits is only for the green.

    Reading how stuff keeps reffering to the 'bubble' and when it'll burst and probs cos I'm posting here. I suddenly remember this very handy visual guide to the stock market as made by Nintendo;

     

    • Thanks 1
    • Haha 3

  3. Posted

    Ahh cool cheers. Yeah I've been a minor Reddit lurker but finally signed to an account to post last week(partly to for JRE sub but actually ended up doing it for qAnonCasualties - as with the Trump thread and the insurrection passed I'm also looking into psychosocial phenomena around Q and Cults and how, like this, the internet is catalysing and teansmogrifying classic collective social phenomena in new ways etcetc) - my current plan is basically see what various 'traditional' sources like media says and then I'm gonna jump into the sub. It's curious because in my recent redditing I saw their name popping up as a half-meme/half-joke in other reddits and now this pops up on the radar.

    Do you have any of your own thoughts on the meta of it? That this couldn't have traditionally happened but can now due to the internet and such tech advancement also allowing greater accessibilty to the markets for more people etc?

     

    Quote

    Personally there is no way I would get in now, but there is absolutely a chance you could double (or more!) your money.

    Pretty much my own feels! Potentially super huge returns - but at a super great risk!

  4. Posted

    8 minutes ago, Will said:

    I’m part of the group and have had my eye on this for a little while. Invested a little a few weeks and cashed out 1/3 of my position yesterday to 4x my original investment.

    It’s been a really interesting one to follow, and some of the analysis people have done on it is quite astonishingly detailed and well thought out. It’s really only hit the mainstream in the last couple of days and that is when this sort of thing starts to get scary and a LOT of money can be lost by people who don’t know what they’re doing.

    Are you thinking of putting some money into it @Rummy? I think it still has some room to grow but it will definitely fall a long way in the not too distant future.

    Have you got any links to good analysis and stuff? I'm only just learning about it. I don't actually put money(plus not in the sitch atm) into the market and have no accounts etc. though I have considered it for when I'm at a certain financial point/threshold again depending how the wider economy is looking and what money will be worth. I like the occasionally follow stuff though or check hunches of things I think might move due to social situations/factors over market etc. but its literally just googling a stock and looking at its price over time then trying to place factors for peaks and troughs. Small fun for me lol.

    The Guardian article above is a bit light for financials of it for folks who dont follow(especially shorts/futures)  just on this CNN one now that has a bit more that to it if anyones a bit confused;

    https://edition.cnn.com/2021/01/27/investing/gamestop-reddit-stock/index.html

    EDIT: to offer at least a speculative answer @Will I'd be about 80/20 for myself against jumping in now; part because I haven't personally been around or deep into it enough to form my own intuitions yet but I think with this exposure now it'll become a risky boom or bust and I'd likely end up jumping in right at the peak like an idiot -.-

  5. Posted

    Not really a hustle, not really a swindle. More of a swizzle?

    Has anybody been seeing this slightly peculiar but interesting news abiut GameStop stock in the US? It seems some subreddit /r/wallstreetbets decided as a collective to buy a bad/failing stock for the lulz - and its now skyrocketing the value on the market. I've just started reading about it and it seems quite curious - baffling traditional econonists/models a bit too apparently.

    One irony in this too ofc is its fucking major traders and hedge funds etc who might have tried to play futures on GameStop with a projection of the price falling and tanking even more - prior to this just happening.

    https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/jan/28/anarchy-in-jokes-and-trolling-the-gamestop-fiasco-is-4chan-think-in-action

  6. Posted

    On 11/01/2021 at 4:46 PM, Jonnas said:

    You'd think it'd be mostly white.

    You know I've actually found the mix of ethnicities I've seen along with all really quite interesting and counter to this. I guess it's progress for multiracial equality if we aren't excluded from participating in good group-bonding acitivies of hate and racism with our white brethren?

    (re: trump tech - again a limit was put on me suggesting i was suggesting just his cabinet - given the whole legal entity of 'The Trump Campaign' he has far more than his cabinet at hand. People keep arguing like Trump is some weak powerless man who wont pursue stuff if people around him wont - we clearly know that isn't true. Technical literacy of his *cabinet* is irrelevant and again dismisses the serious issues that people like Trump can cause);

     

    Which I mention because I want to put this to folks - what do you think the future of the GOP could would or should be? Double-down on Trumpism/Populism/FakeNewsAltFactsDenialPsyOpsEtcEtcEtc or move away from it back to some semblance of self?

    Asking as reportedly the Arizona branch of GOP have...decided to censure a few republicans who haven't agreed with Trump? Mostly stupidly of note being Cindy McCain - the late John McCain's wife(the LOSER who didnt have his mate trump up bone spur bullshit actually served got captured like a fool and stuck it out - typically non-conservative ideas) and a few house/senate members I think. It strikes me however as the most amazingly ridiculous and disconnected thing to do - UNLESS you want to appeal to the Trump base. Yet....why would you when you as Arizona just lost the state to Biden and iirc senate seats too - under the Trump ticket?

    Ofc I'm no fan of the GOP but politics is politics. I personally think they need to enact a slow purge of the Trumpists(blanket on all who objected to electoral college votes on Trump's behalf) and possibly nebulise around Mitt Romney. I think whilst Trump has gained a lot of followers - some Republicans are getting really turned off(The Lincoln Project a great example in modern sphere) and I'm intrigued to see what their future holds whilst they decide between being The Trump Party or The Grand Old Party again.

     

    EDIT: More to do with the insurrection; seen talk of this robocall for the 'rally' pop up a few times in news but seemingly nobody knows or has much if any accountability for it. Now it's being suggested it was a conditional dark money donor push;

    https://amp.montgomeryadvertiser.com/amp/4243389001

  7. Posted

    8 minutes ago, Cube said:

     

    For the majority of his followers, having to go to a different website would be inconvenient. The moment something like this becomes inconvenient, they give up. A lot of them also don't see the point if they can't anger others. 

    Ofc I agree with this and the rhings above - but this is exactly what I'm saying. Sure it wouldn't be up to anything the others were - but it would have been something whilst he has so far had nothing with such a minimal outlay.

    Besides which - who has to go anywhere? You get all of Trump's sycophants to tweet the site/link. Just link everything - lets be honest how often are most of us already every day just pasting and clicking links and not going to websites? Get Jared Ivanka etcetc to tweet out the site(thus you know its genuine by association) have them explain to folks how to bookmark - what is it more than just another click of a button the same way you'd click onto Trump's twitter?

    I'm not saying ofc anything being said isn't valid - it's all exactly the sort of reasons why you wouldn't do it. But man....with his momenum the moment he got banned imagine an exclusive Donald Trump website just popped up? Posted to by him for him - they sell it as his temporary twitter replacement and develop it into his next platform over time - aiming to build ground up self-sufficient.

     

    Honestly the more I look at what happened with Trump and all of it in these past four years and just how *obvious* it all was it almost looked dumb - just think if they'd been even just a little bit smarter.

     

    They weren't though - and I recommend having a look around tinternets about the fall out within qAnon as a social phenomena - it's shattering some very fragile and (snow)flakey 'realities' for some, though this report amused me a fair bit;

     

    https://lawandcrime.com/u-s-capitol-siege/qanon-supporter-asked-authorities-if-he-was-being-duped-after-expecting-pence-arrest-at-insurrection-testimony/

  8. Posted

    *RANDOM STREAM OF THOUGHT*

     

    possibly a stupid question just popped into my head but like if Trump has so much tech strat folk around him etc - why when he was banned from twitter did he not just....make a website? old school? buy a wordpress format host it yourself or buy some hosting and literally just get jared to tell all the lads ivanka to tell all the ladies - if he just needed/wanted a voice and platform....he had one just setup elsewhere?

     

    like...did he NEED social media right then? if you gave him a blog style site where he could essentially tweet from - what loss? people can share the links on twitter. on facebook. on parler. etcetc.

    i feel really stupid for only thinking about it now but srsly - a website is nothing. if its a single twitter feed of Trump its also super low key resource-wise barring the traffic/flood protection?

    ofc hindsight is 20/20. But he coulda smashef himself a cracker if someone in his team and maybe just thought a hit old school and grabbed a Geocities?

     

    Am I mad in this? It seems so simple so obvious that it wouldn't have worked but...compared to him now having no real public voice I'm surprised nobody has put this idea to him - it could still work even now?

     

  10. Posted

    I'll respond to any posts etc. later as I'm following this and other things atm and not currently checking this thread but this has so far been my absolute favourite meme so far(if you don't know who; check Stacey Abrams from GA - unsung hero many of us will not appreciate - she possibly just flipped the entire US away from Republic power due to GA runoffs alonh with her election efforts);

    137363234_795207832682_26930432361922066

  11. Posted

    On 04/01/2021 at 7:43 PM, Pestneb said:

    Sorry Rummy but in terms of relevance and interest, potential PM of the country is of greater relevance and interest than the President of any other nation. The US, China and Russia are notable nations, but we don't hear about every stupid/morally dubious thing they do. at the moment, basically trump is having a tantrum, it isn't "news". News would be trump taking it on the chin, and behaving like an adult and following rules and protocols etc. Reporting on what he's upto now would be akin to saying "and today, there wasn't an earthquake in London, Paris, Berlin, Madrid..... etc etc. Utterly uninteresting.

    "the point being any and all media that vilified Jeremy Corbyn should surrly rightfully be vilifying Trump for this pretty illegal looking phone call. "

    I don't see why. As ronnie said, the UK media focuses on the UK, the rest of the world is more peripheral. as you mentioned, the media don't mention most things, but it's not possible to. the sheer volume of "news" is too great, so they have to choose things based on interest, relevance and newsworthiness. Trump having a tantrum and breaking rules/norms is very far from newsworthy in it's own, Would you rather have a new paper full or the crap trump has done, or something looking at covid, brexit etc. it's a lot closer and relevant, it's not because the media love trump. sure media bias exists (including "fine" media you love. it all has some bias, no matter how much they may try to avoid it, but it's not always the reason they ignore subject matters.

    Just to address what I felt was obvious given ourselves here - I never and was never referring to 'newspapers' as it were. I am not popping to the shop every day and reading just one news publisher's output. In this current modern digital world that just doesn't happen - and whilst you guys may be focusing on headlines and attention grabbers YOU see I'm talking as somebody who regular checks various different outlets and their output - would you be willing to find me one single site that is a UK media based organisation that DOESNT report on ANY foreign politics? Foreign news is still news. It always has been. We've always seen foreign correspondents. I am not critiquing main headlines - I READ the sections of papers where they offer their foreign news - yes I was being facetious but I compare news outlets within and of themselves as well as at the same time comparing differences between them. I won't pretend I'm taking some highly empirical approach to all this - but it seems all 3 of you have presumed I'm just popping down the local picking up the Daily Mail every day or something(who curiously actually had MORE prominent reporting than I expected to encounter on Melissa Carone when I was looking into that issue but thats just a nuance) - do any of YOU do that? How do you guys consume YOUR news? In a digital world its nothing like the newspaper world of old - and I don't live in that. I have millions of websites at my fingertips to explore - there's no need to jump just at headlines no stick to just one source. I presumed this was kinda obvious.

  13. Posted

    9 minutes ago, Ronnie said:

    Excuse me?

    I was replying to Will's post, whether you so disrespectfully regard it as useless or not.

    You mean the one asking me a direct question quoting me? Cease and desist with me Ronnie - or I'll temporarily ban you from this thread(tbh been so long since I had to not sure if thats even still a thing, but point stands). Only warning. Cease and desist with me.

    • Haha 1

  14. Posted

    7 hours ago, Ronnie said:

    This.

    There's plenty of international condemnation but the UK media concern themselves more with UK politics, funnily enough, and Trump's actions atm are a US issue.

    Yeah or you could read my direct reply to that immediately above, instead of blindly commenting uselessly? Trying to Troll me here, @Ronnie? We all know that's not cool by the rules. Your form gives you no pass.

     

    I'll give this too - it was a Saturday call and its a weekend - less happens. Yet if you look at various outlets there is often an absence or lightness of reporting(and lets not pretend no UK media jumps at Trump just as much as they liked to jump at Corbyn). I see some of the Americans themselves are now speaking out in condemnation and that's being reported - but why don't papers report the seriousness and potential legal implications with their story?

    Look at all this election fraud stuff - many courts dismissed for standing let alone then merits if they could even hear the case - its not difficult to explain or report - but the news articles don't bother to explain it much to people - hence Trump can say stupid stuff like saying he's not assigned a Judge for his cases or that they won't 'hear' the case not listen etcetc. Patent falsehoods.

  15. Posted

    2 hours ago, Will said:

    What media do you consume that takes these view points? As far as I can tell, ignoring things like Fox, basically everyone thinks Trump is a joke.

    Can’t say I’m at all surprised by this, it’s exactly in line with his way of doing things. Only three weeks to go and it will be over. At least his involvement with power will be, I have a feeling the comedy of the man’s actions will continue to entertain us all for a while yet.

    Well I was obviously being facetious - the point being any and all media that vilified Jeremy Corbyn should surrly rightfully be vilifying Trump for this pretty illegal looking phone call. It's a sad shame of media as a bias - but is the difficult case of complaining about what they are NOT reporting enough rather than what they are - and them I'm QAnoning. Consider most of the tradition coverage of Trump as he's always been a headlime grabber but...why not now? Call him out seriously and publicly? The media helped cause this do they not have some responsility etcetc.

    (this is, ofc all, just rhetorics from me. We both this whole thing is far more complex and nuanced than that - but I can't really deep delve all that sort of stuff in a passing forum post :p)

     

    As for us not being surprised - sure very few of us are. That's a problem though imo. I think it's real damn dangerous just normalising all of this. Or writing it off just because its Trump. That's the Cult of Personality.

     

    Edit: Basically its not fucking acceptable to me that in a few months all the Trumpers(in office/position of power) and 'allies' will basically just be that monkey puppet meme thing. Accountability is imo important - and its dying out even morr than it already was amongst the upper echelons. It isn't sustainable.

    • Like 1

  19. Posted

    On 28/12/2020 at 2:12 PM, Sméagol said:

    Yeah makes sense. I just hate the fact the forum software just doesn't plainly tell me what the problem is. "it's not in a supported format" is obviously bullshit.

    "Reports that say that something hasn't happened are always interesting to me, because as we know, there are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns—the ones we don't know we don't know. And if one looks throughout the history of our country and other free countries, it is the latter category that tends to be the difficult ones.[1]"

    Not to be my actual usual political self but I do wanna say - null values are one helluva of a drug....hehehe.

     

     

  21. Posted

    15 hours ago, Fierce_LiNk said:
      Where I am... (Reveal hidden contents)

    I've just met the Sky Pirates and defeated that dragon boss of theirs. Now I'm helping out the dragon in the cave.

    I'm spending a bit of time grinding to level up my team and metamorphose them. Game is lots of fun. 

     

    Ahhh you're smashing it! Don't think I even got there on my original playthrough - I'm still not playing and probs on the boat just after getting the alkhemy pot from the djinn(forget his name but im sure it's something like al-khemi?)

  23. Posted

    47 minutes ago, Will said:

    That video in particular has been set to not allow embedding by the owner.

    Aha! How is it that you find out? Was half-aware of it as a thing didn't think it was much done by many tho(gotta get dem views innit)

  25. Posted

    12 hours ago, Sméagol said:

    Yeah, but I wanted to embed that particular video. Plus another which had the same problem. Copy protection rights woud be my guess, but I've never seen those errors before.

    Hmm I was just speculation there may be a correlation in your content that more of what you want to use doesnt work. Youtube has certainly gone hard on the ads recently and I did note some stuff doesn't preview embed in whatsapp lately - I'd be curious if its happening to the same videos both here and whatsapp. I think I'd conclude rights/drm issues similar to yourself - poss linked to tevenue protrction and Youtube's monetization schemes. Pure speculation tho.

×