I saw this deleted at Superstonk. If they are trying to silence it, then it must be good.
I wonder how many GME shorts are hidden in these swaps???
this post was submitted on 29 Nov 2023
22 points (100.0% liked)
WhyDRS
5 readers
1 users here now
Community to discuss the WhyDRS.org project and resources, and how to spread DRS advocacy and information to all investors for all securities.
Have a great idea to spread the word? There are some resources here to get started!
https://www.whydrs.org/free-resources
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
This seems completely wild. What was this, the maximum possible amount they could enter on this line?
It's comical. like a typo.
Anyone know what the actual source is for this screenshot? The article you have shared does not include it.
looks like the ole' F3 overflow (jk/idk)
I'm no programmer, but the maximum viable value as a placeholder for non-viable or unknown values seems dumb. Even if the odds of the maximum value actually being valid and accurate are slim to none, it would be silly to introduce that risk willingly. It would make more sense and be more robust if it simply defaulted no "null" in cases of non-valid or unknown values. The 999... value is too big to make sense, and the placeholder explanation is too dumb to make sense also.
Since this Hal Turner person doesn't provide any source whatsoever I won't bother thinking more about it, frankly. Time will tell regardless.