Canadian Money Forum banner
121 - 140 of 286 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,446 Posts
Have you ever watched kids learn to interact?
They start out mimicing behaviour, and many people revert to that in situations they don't know what's going on.

I think social referencing is more at play than people think.
In fact, mirroring and other "cheats" can be used to connect to people.
I've worked a lot with AI and I can just tell that you cannot compare AI learning to kids learning.

AI can sure give an illusion to some extent, but no more.

You are still referring to the acting part in social interactions, but that's just a small part of the human behaviour.

We try to understand humans with the Johari window. It helps understanding relationships and behaviours. That Johari window won't ever apply to AI.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,878 Posts
I've worked a lot with AI and I can just tell that you cannot compare AI learning to kids learning.

AI can sure give an illusion to some extent, but no more.

You are still referring to the acting part in social interactions, but that's just a small part of the human behaviour.

We try to understand humans with the Johari window. It helps understanding relationships and behaviours. That Johari window won't ever apply to AI.
You are glancing on my point.

AI can act like a human.
You say they can "give an illusion", an illusion is all acting is.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,878 Posts
You would know, I'm sure.

Given your posting history I'm not surprised you mentioned GPT3
Not sure if that was a slight accusing me of being an AI. Of course take an intro philosophy course and debate if you're a brain in a bucket, or not.


Well I can read and that article is about as well (or better) "thought out" than most articles
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,446 Posts
You say they can "give an illusion", an illusion is all acting is.
Depends how good the illusion really is. And depends how good the illusion has to be. Acting is just one behaviour, meant to try to mimic other behaviours.

Not sure if that was a slight accusing me of being an AI. Of course take an intro philosophy course and debate if you're a brain in a bucket, or not.

Well I can read and that article is about as well (or better) "thought out" than most articles
It wrote that article because it was designed to, programmed to and asked to. And they took the single best result. It has no intent to communicate something. Humans write articles on their own willing to communicate and express themselves, their ideas, opinions and feelings.

Intelligence is consciousness and free will.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,446 Posts
You're getting into a major philosophical discussion at this point.
It's an interesting discussion if free will exists, or it's just the illusion of free will.
Yeah, I agree, I'm getting too deep and indeed free will is an interesting discussion.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
24,715 Posts
Discussion Starter · #129 · (Edited)
There are reports that Robinhood is drawing from liquidity lines.

Could mean Robinhood is at risk of collapse, with their unhinged margin speculators run amok. Memories of Refco and Opes Prime. There's no way to predict this kind of thing of course (without insider knowledge) but Robinhood is definitely a high risk brokerage.

This will be interesting to watch. I'd say this brokerage is at high risk of collapse, considering it runs on a shoestring budget, is totally overloaded with insane speculators, lots of margin lending, plus various bugs in their platform that are exploited to use more margin. Not to mention their gamblers addicted to options, probably with naked strategies too.

The extreme volatility is dangerous for all brokerages. Keep in mind that brokers do not maintain 1:1 allocation of real shares to positions in client accounts. Nor do brokers actually keep (segregated) cash on the books. The "cash" shown in accounts is a liability of the brokerage to you; the actual cash is used by the broker for their business operations, and is gone, a long time ago.

And when huge numbers of shares are moving in & out, those shares you see in the account also may not really exist.

For example the Reddit guy showing $13 million cash in his account, in reality has no cash. Since Robinhood is drawing liquidity lines, it's clear they don't have the cash, and that $13 million is a liability of Robinhood. Whether the gambler will ever collect on it, is another question.

These Reddit gamblers have no clue what game they're playing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
24,715 Posts
Discussion Starter · #131 ·
Forget Gamestop and AMC, those are old news. Bo-oring.

Now social media is abuzz about Dogecoin. It's a krypto koin based on a dog meme. It looks like it's up 5x to maybe 6x (six fold) since yesterday.

Reddit is pumping DOGECOIN as we speak. Their reddit forums are instructing members on how to vote and share the posts so that the social media algorithms pick up the story and amplify the pump. The are all sharing information on how to buy their DOGECOIN through Robinhood.

Elon Musk has also previously pumped it. Millennials and degenerate gamblers are scrambling to all get on board.

Once Robinhood stopped trading on GME, the price on Bitcoin and Dogecoin started shooting up like crazy.

lol you can't make this stuff up. Just in case any of you actually believed that Reddit/Robinhood gamblers are some kind of elaborate social movement or establishing a new world order.

They're just degenerate, dopamine-seeking gamblers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
681 Posts
Keep in mind that brokers do not maintain 1:1 allocation of real shares to positions in client accounts.
Huhhh what? That's not what my statements claim. I don't have margin though so perhaps that's what you are referring to?

The "cash" shown in accounts is a liability of the brokerage to you; the actual cash is used by the broker for their business operations, and is gone, a long time ago.
Indeed, that part is clearly spelled out. Keeping cash in a Robinhood account is likely worse than keeping it on a bitcoin exchange these days. I doubt many read the fine print though.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,878 Posts
Forget Gamestop and AMC, those are old news. Bo-oring.

Now social media is abuzz about Dogecoin. It's a krypto koin based on a dog meme. It looks like it's up 5x to maybe 6x (six fold) since yesterday.
The fact that you're using K for crypto is suggetive..

If you think it's a silly meme coin you're missing the point.
It's a social coin, also the way it work with Litecoin was a very interesting technical development at the time.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,878 Posts
The extreme volatility is dangerous for all brokerages. Keep in mind that brokers do not maintain 1:1 allocation of real shares to positions in client accounts. Nor do brokers actually keep (segregated) cash on the books. The "cash" shown in accounts is a liability of the brokerage to you; the actual cash is used by the broker for their business operations, and is gone, a long time ago.
My TDDI account statements clearly state that my stock is "SEG"
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
24,715 Posts
Discussion Starter · #135 ·
My TDDI account statements clearly state that my stock is "SEG"
It's certainly good when a position is segregated. But it doesn't quite mean what you think it means, in the context of broker insolvency. It's described in this thread along with a link to the CIPF which explains this


If TDDI collapses and it turns out they have a shortfall of shares in aggregate across all accounts, YOU will share in the loss. The loss/shortfall is shared equally among all customers, whether or not their positions were marked as segregated. It's directly spelled out in the CIPF link from that other discussion.

So my original statement was correct. The sad thing here is that if the broker collapses, the fact you saw "SEG" in your statements does not mean that you are free and clear of suffering losses. As brokerage customers, we all hope that TDDI is reasonably close to the 1:1 allocation of shares.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,878 Posts
It's certainly good when a position is segregated. But it doesn't quite mean what you think it means, in the context of broker insolvency. It's described in this thread along with a link to the CIPF which explains this


If TDDI collapses and it turns out they have a shortfall of shares in aggregate across all accounts, YOU will share in the loss. The loss/shortfall is shared equally among all customers, whether or not their positions were marked as segregated. It's directly spelled out in the CIPF link from that other discussion.

So my original statement was correct. The sad thing here is that if the broker collapses, the fact you saw "SEG" in your statements does not mean that you are free and clear of suffering losses. As brokerage customers, we all hope that TDDI is reasonably close to the 1:1 allocation of shares.
Brokers who are members of the Canadian Investor Protection Fund (CIPF) are required to segregate all fully paid securities.
As far as I know, TDDI does not have the legal right to loan my shares.


It's crazy that a brokerage can still lose your shares, I didn't know this and I'm going to be putting a proposal to my MP and the minister of finance to get this fixed.

It is absolutely nuts that the brokerage might be able to loan out and lose my assets.

I honestly (and apparently) naively thought if I had a cash account, and fully paid for my stock, it was mine. Like 100% mine and nobody could take it, or lend it or lose it.

Now I see why people still keep cash under their mattress, and it makes the idea of cryptocurrencies that I OWN even more appealing.
If my wallet says I own bitcoin, I own it, apparently unlike anything in the custody of the financial industry.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
24,715 Posts
Discussion Starter · #137 ·
It's crazy that a brokerage can still lose your shares, I didn't know this and I'm going to be putting a proposal to my MP and the minister of finance to get this fixed.

It is absolutely nuts that the brokerage might be able to loan out and lose my assets.

I honestly (and apparently) naively thought if I had a cash account, and fully paid for my stock, it was mine. Like 100% mine and nobody could take it, or lend it or lose it.

Now I see why people still keep cash under their mattress, and it makes the idea of cryptocurrencies that I OWN even more appealing.
If my wallet says I own bitcoin, I own it, apparently unlike anything in the custody of the financial industry.
All good points, and I want this to be a stronger protection as well.

It's one reason I go with the largest, most reliable brokerages (only big banks). I can't imagine ever taking a risk on smaller ones.

I have much more confidence in TDDI or RBC's management of these positions, and making sure they actually have the stock holdings, than with a smaller brokerage.

You CAN make a stock position completely yours by transferring to a physical stock certificate, which moves it from street name to your name. It becomes truly in your name and immune to losses. On the other hand, there are extra costs in doing that and it will be a pain if you ever want to sell it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,652 Posts
You CAN make a stock position completely yours by transferring to a physical stock certificate, which moves it from street name to your
name. It becomes truly in your name and immune to losses. On the other hand, there are extra costs in doing that and it will be a pain if you ever want to sell it.
What do you think happens if everyone tried to transfer their stocks to a physical certificate??

What if I told you that this is exactly how crypto works except you can use decentralized exchanges to trade easier. You can also provide liquidity to the decentralized exchanges to earn income that these brokers are currently earning off your idle shares instead of you

Give it 5-10 years and stocks should be tokenized on blockchains
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
904 Posts
Brokers who are members of the Canadian Investor Protection Fund (CIPF) are required to segregate all fully paid securities.
As far as I know, TDDI does not have the legal right to loan my shares.




It is absolutely nuts that the brokerage might be able to loan out and lose my assets.

I honestly (and apparently) naively thought if I had a cash account, and fully paid for my stock, it was mine. Like 100% mine and nobody could take it, or lend it or lose it.
 
121 - 140 of 286 Posts
Top