Yeah, Mercury's going to have to up their game if they want to stay relevant. I remember my disappointment when I found out I had to park 250k in a 0-yield checking account to qualify for the 1.5% yield on a savings account that can only do something like 5 transfers a month, making it a complete non-starter for running a real business. It felt like they're playing all the same old tricks on us as the incumbent banks, just with a prettier UI.
This new Brex account with 0 fees and 1.6% yield on the entire deposit with no transaction limits feels like a breath of fresh air in comparison.
I wouldn't be so sure, there was the rather plausible speculation that the 3% from Robinhood was a loss leader that wasn't meant to last long, in order to drum up hype for the launch. They could very well have been planning to earn the fed rate and fronting the difference for a period of time and then bait & switching (and/or introducing some premium plan to make up the difference).
Also, money market funds, which are generally considered cash-equivalents, don't usually yield north 3% either afaik, and I can imagine putting customers deposits in riskier higher yielding investments could have also have ran foul of banking regulations.
Brex is using neither of these strategies here as far as I can tell, and they're providing a decent amount of transparency into how the funds are going to be handled, so it should be fairly easy for regulators to review. If regulators do take issue with their strategy, I suspect we'll probably hear about it in the news soon enough. In the mean time, it's still an early access product, so it's not like we can use it immediately anyways (I'll definitely be signing up though).
From the first sentence under the "What are securities" section:
> SIPC protects stocks, bonds, Treasury securities, certificates of deposit, mutual funds, money market mutual funds and certain other investments as "securities."
Surely I can't be the only one irked by the fact that they're bringing the concept of "copies" and "borrowing" to what are just bytes sitting on hard drives that can be copied and transmitted at 0 marginal cost?
I agree that it's a better user experience than the non-digital alternative, but I'd like to see digital books at libraries be available for free to anyone who wants it at any time, without any arbitrary restrictions whatsoever.
> SIPC protects against the loss of cash and securities – such as stocks and bonds – held by a customer at a financially-troubled SIPC-member brokerage firm.
It sounds like SIPC protects against loss of cash for the purpose of purchasing securities _and_ the loss of the securities themselves. So in this case it sounds like by sweeping customers' cash into a money market fund, SIPC protection would apply to the money market fund investment.
I think Robinhood's issue might have been that they didn't actually do any securities trading and tried to just rely on SIPC insurance for customers' cash that's just sitting around.
Regardless of if my interpretation is correct, I'd be _really_ surprised if they just somehow ignored the whole Robinhood fiasco and managed to make the exact same mistake on the regulatory side.
From the deafening silence I'm going to take the less charitable interpretation that it's meant to enable Cloudflare to essentially sell Warp users' IPs to Cloudflare customers as an added perk.
I wished on more than 1 occasion that I could just use one of my ZeroTier nodes in other locations as an exit node and tunnel traffic through it though.
I think that might already be possible but it'd be nice if the configuration was abstracted away behind some simple interface.
That'd allow it to replace Wireguard and Mullvad for me as I mostly use it as a means to bypass georestrictions.
Most successful companies do both. Listening to your users is of course important, but it can't be a wholesale replacement for data driven aggregate behavior analysis because people have their own biases can forget things (and sometimes lie) and individual feedback can't be easily generalized to your entire population of users past a certain scale.
> forgetting the kind of person who is techie enough to use RSS feeds is probably techie enough to turn off telemetry
More like they have no choice but to ignore them because these are users who explicitly chose to be ignored.
If you want your usage patterns to affect product decisions in a product you use, then don't disable telemetry for that product. You can't have it both ways.
That explains why everybody puts up with it. It doesn't explain why a startup like Mercury can't come along and shake up the status quo by not nickle and diming their customers like the greedy fucks that are the incumbents.
> I can totally understand it in cases where the alleged offense is something like uploading copyrighted content to YouTube, where there is clear evidence and an audit trail saying "Here's what you uploaded, here's when you uploaded it, and here's the point where the rights holder registered it in ContentID, etc"
Probably not the best example. There are countless reports of ContentID falsely claiming copyright violations. I personally had a gaming video muted for violating some copyright by some company I never heard of when the only thing playing were ingame sound effects (no music).
I'm curious what the article is referring to when it comes to collision resistance. I was looking at the GitHub repo posted below and saw only claims of "strong" collision resistance: https://github.com/google/highwayhash
Unfortunately I'm not familiar enough with the details of the collision resistance properties of the other hash functions here to know how they compare. Could someone elaborate on the specifics of why HighwayHash compares poorly in terms of collision resistance to the others in the benchmark?
I use Google Voice extensively too. The problem I often run into is a bunch of services (like Uber, and one of my credit card companies Synchrony Bank) don't accept Google Voice numbers. What do folks usually do in those cases? Are there services like google voice but don't have the non-acceptance problem?
I can absolutely imagine why existing tech companies would be interested if the protocol became so popular that they'd be stupid to ignore it and start from scratch with their own protocol, like XMPP was at one point.
I'd be more interested in seeing how they plan on preventing the whole Embrace, Extend, Extinguish thing pretty much every company pulled with their initially XMPP based chat apps that gained market share, turning them into back into closed silos.
Being somewhat of a functional programming zealot (coming from the Clojure camp, so please excuse me if these are stupid questions, considering my lack of familiarity with typed functional programming in general), this is something that has always bothered me about TypeScript's type system, the poor support for higher order functions.
It's a hard coded list of 10 signature overrides that allows it to support up to 10 piped functions. Obviously the actual ramda pipe function can support an arbitrary number of piped functions at runtime, but the types as written only supports 10.
This seems awfully inelegant and inflexible. I assume there is some fundamental deficiency in TypeScript's type system that forces people to specify types this way, otherwise it would have been rewritten by now.
Is higher kinded types what's missing to be able to express higher order functions and functional composition in an elegant way? If so, can someone provide an example of what the type signature of a pipe function would look like with higher kinded types? Any ideas if higher kinded types are being considered as additions in future versions of TypeScript, or if that's even feasible at all?
Thank you for providing your side of the story. While I can no longer edit my post to point to this, I have upvoted this post to hopefully bring some visibility to it, and encourage others to do the same.
Until someone can provide a chat log of what was actually said in that conversation that led up to that comment, it's still going to be difficult for any outside observer to make up their own mind on whether or not those words were indeed taken out of context to the degree that you suggest. But I can appreciate that it could be frustrating to deal with someone who behaves as you claim, even if his intentions might be to keep the protocol open and secure.
This new Brex account with 0 fees and 1.6% yield on the entire deposit with no transaction limits feels like a breath of fresh air in comparison.