Right -- this is pretty clear cut fraud.

I think the normalization of criminal activity in the crypto space is largely due to regulatory ignorance but when there are clear cut cases of fraud, the SEC should aggressively prosecute these crooks.

Not sure when long form shitposting became acceptable but no one wants to read this tripe

> "Theft and violence reigns supreme in a lawless urban wasteland" > "How are these anecdotes relevant?"

This is a tremendous leap in logic, but I am suggesting that Baltimore's problems can and do exist wholly independently of the engineering standards of Korean automakers

It doesn't. Cars which are easy theft targets have an actual impact on police availability, because they have to investigate this shit alongside problems that people didn't create for themselves by buying shitty cars. Just because it doesn't directly affect you, personally, doesn't indicate that problems are unrelated.

Ok. I mean, we've all seen The Wire. But the problem with Kia and Hyundai is happening in other cities across the country, and is well documented on social media. There absolutely is something special about these particular makes, so discounting it just doesn't make sense.

This sounds exactly like the LIBOR rigging scam, various commodity market scandals. People rightfully go to jail for this stuff -- meanwhile we see the big tech companies bid rig

Actually, we didn't see that many people go to jail for rigging the LIBOR rate. There were a few fall guys but a lot of people made a lot of money.

It was a fake rate anyway and they only moved it around a little, what Jedi Blue did was far more criminal and egregious. The ad networks act with impunity, for example, they know when a user has installed an app with no connection to them and then they serve that user ads for the app and then attribute the install to themselves! out and out fraud but they'll just claim the algo is really complex and our ML/AI doesn't have intent.

“Give us lots of money or you will lose your business” is basically they argument. It obviously works in some cases but I seriously suspect most advertising money is wasted.

>It was a fake rate anyway

It was my impression that everyone uses LIBOR, so even a tiny change has massive consequences.

Many rates were based on LIBOR, but LIBOR itself was used for nothing other than betting, no one was lending or borrowing at it.

Which is exactly what I said?

Diesel demand comes from shipping goods primarily. How do we replace the 4 million trucks on the road quickly? How do we get rid of container ship emissions? How do we solve backup generation problem? Go look at what's happening in South America right now because of low water levels -- lots of diesel generation.

We need to wean off fossil fuels but governments need to subsidize and support alternatives which they are doing bare minimum today.

Great summary and analysis. The context on the cracker shutdowns in February makes it all the more clear. This processing bottleneck has been playing out across the commodities sphere as the 2nd order impacts from COVID play out.

You're right for some oil but there isn't enough rail infrastructure to enable Canadian crude growth without pipelines. Discounting WCS crude diffs to WTI will price out most long term production growth without offsetting higher crude flat price. Demand for oil isn't perfectly inelastic, so higher flat price enables more fuel switching (e.g. electric).

This is exactly what Tesoro did a couple years ago. They sold their entire asset mix to Marathon, probably why they want Goff on the board.

The 2 who were elected were a former Tesoro executive (oil refiner) and a Neste (another oil refiner) busdev person who helped develop their industry leading biofuels business. You can see why a vanguard or Blackrock would sign up for that as they actually make sense for an oil company. Really, we should be asking who the heck the other, existing board members are and why were either of these picks were controversial to management?

This is probably illegal via antitrust law -- it's inherently anticompetitive -- and just hasn't been tested. Another example of Amazon being an unethical company.