“Unfortunately, much of this knowledge – and the texts that contained it – was destroyed during the Spanish Inquisition, leaving only a few bits and pieces from which to reconstruct these advanced methods for celestial prediction.“
Not the Inquisition, which happened on a different continent!
> The inquisition expanded to other domains under the Spanish Crown, including Southern Italy and the Americas, while also targeting those accused of alumbradismo, Protestantism, witchcraft, blasphemy, bigamy, sodomy, Freemasonry, etc.
I don’t think the Eu got it right; crucially they missed requiring these choice points to be automatedly navigable for users (eg “.. and if you must publish the metadata representing the choice architecture this way, use these standard keywords to present options, and must allow users to use automation to make their selection “)
The first reg this happens in will I think make billions the world over realize this is what the template of all opt-in online regulation has to be and will hopefully change the world.
That's a case of the perfect being the enemy of the good.
If you boil the lobster all at once, the huge ad industry will ensure such regulation never passes.
If you gradually increase regulation, then it stands a change of actually passing, and eventually accomplishes the same goal (even if over a longer timeframe).
Getting everyone to agree that a mandatory, regulated prompt is required is step 1.
“The SEC this week told Mr. Burr, a North Carolina Republican who retired from the Senate at the start of the year, that it closed the investigation and wouldn’t take enforcement action against him.”
Regulators had earlier said that Mr. Burr had material nonpublic information about the Covid-19 pandemic in February 2020 when he sold virtually all of the stock he owned through a retirement account.
It is believed that those snakes you see in the logo for medical services (caduceus) are actually Guinea worms as physicians used to advertise their services that way. See for example
You've posted an article that conflates the two symbols, but the caduceus means different things than the Rod of Asclepius and has different origins despite the similar appearance.
the wikipedia article on the Rod of Asclepius tells the story of the parasitic worms, so while the GP perhaps should not have mentioned Caduceus, he's referring to an actual story associated with the medical symbol.
And in the age of Covid, perhaps the Caduceus "ancient and consistent associations with trade, liars, thieves, eloquence, negotiation, alchemy, and wisdom" is just perfect for the state of medical science and public health and laboratory gain of function experiments, horse dewormers, and mRNA vaccines which turn out to be no so much like the vaccines we're used to.
~330 million people live in the United States. 7.6 billion live outside of it. Be honest to yourself: which of your vs. op’s take is probably the more valid one?
> The Caduceus became a symbol of alchemy and pharmacy in medieval Europe. Its first appearance as a medical symbol can be traced back to 1st−4th century CE in Oculists’ stamps that were found mostly in Celtic areas, such as Gaul, Germany and Britain, which had an engraving of the name of the physician, the name of the special medicine or medical formula and the disease for which the medicine was to be used [1]
“.. older representations from Syria and India of sticks and animals looking like serpents or worms are interpreted by some as a direct representation of traditional treatment of dracunculiasis, the Guinea worm disease.“
In Persian, old times, snake was a symbol of health! Even today “sick” in Persian translates to “Snake-less”!
I was also believed that snakes eat the animals that can carry dangerous sicknesses (small mammals) and their existence is a sign of healthy environment.
I am not sure if it’s related to the said logo but thought it might be interesting.
tldr: if you're bitten by a bronzelook at a copper snake wrapped around a pole and you'll live
> 6 Then the Lord sent venomous snakes among them; they bit the people and many Israelites died. 7 The people came to Moses and said, “We sinned when we spoke against the Lord and against you. Pray that the Lord will take the snakes away from us.” So Moses prayed for the people.
8 The Lord said to Moses, “Make a snake and put it up on a pole; anyone who is bitten can look at it and live.” 9 So Moses made a bronze snake and put it up on a pole. Then when anyone was bitten by a snake and looked at the bronze snake, they lived.
Incidents and accidents notwithstanding, those involved in calls with and modelling for analysts and rating agencies are well aware of these rules. At least in my firm there is proper compliance coaching and continual awareness programmes about closed periods and internal continuity on what is disclosed publicly and when. Schedules are transparent and analyst calls in audio or transcripts are made available. Industry professionals even read these of competing firms, especially when there's trouble or a lol to be had. There's a lot that can go wrong, intentionally or not, but this part is quite a managed process.
Some companies like Microsoft were highly rigorous in managing information disclosure, and also in maintaining a lengthy quiet period. I could often hear investor relations at MSFT in the backgrounds of calls flipping through their internal playbooks of what they can and cannot say. Some other companies weren't as structured. I can't speak for how corporates managed disclosures internally, but I managed my own risk by typically publishing right after e.g. a corporate access event to reduce the risk of selective disclosure of material information.
I saw a handful of Reg FD filing updates and stock halts when new information was accidentally put out there by management. That was always embarrassing.
Short answer: reg fd requires companies to disclose information material to investors to all investors. The previous post is suggesting that the close work with the bank analysts is conveying material information without proper disclosure.
My hunch is that the legions is compliance lawyers at both the banks and at the companies have deemed this to be within the bounds of the regulation, but we’ll see if the SEC/US Attorneys agree.
That's incorrect for these style of calls. The help is more akin to marketing - the company is arguing that they are doing better than the analyst thinks, and the analyst's company is offering their help to explain that to them and to other analysts.
That isn't what stock market manipulation[1] means.
Market manipulation may involve techniques including:
Spreading false or misleading information about a company;
Engaging in a series of transactions to make a security appear more actively traded; and
Rigging quotes, prices, or trades to make it look like there is more or less demand for a security than is the case.
Presenting real information in a way that makes it more clear to investors is absolutely not market manipulation, and no interested party would ever claim otherwise.
Where they aware everyone got bailed out in 2008, with nearly zero consequences?
The regulation you are expecting does not exist, in practice. Yes they wrote it down in a book. No, it's not real. It's as though I'm in a world of finance believers and I'm a finance atheist.
