A Windows XP help forum. PCbanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PCbanter forum » Windows 10 » Windows 10 Help Forum
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Agent Intercept



 
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old January 16th 20, 01:05 AM posted to comp.os.linux.advocacy,alt.comp.os.windows-10
The Letter K
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1
Default Agent Intercept

-hh wrote in
:

On Wednesday, January 15, 2020 at 9:38:51 AM UTC-5, mGhost wrote:
-hh wrote:
mGhost wrote:
-hh wrote:
No idea what you are talking about. A cross-country check can
easily


take a whopping 5 business days to actually clear...And in the
stock


market, it is absolutely 3 days. These are facts.

What I was saying is that what it takes them to do is less than
what

they tell you.
By a large margin, as they profit from being “slow” t

o post your credit.

And what I am telling you is you're making up bull****. I'll say
it again, and if you like, call a ****ing bank manager, talk to a
broker,


pray to God, do whatever the **** you like, but I am correct.

If you’re correct, then just how are Day Traders able to transa

ct? Be sure to think it through.

Look you stupid ****. I have already explained. It is called, MARGIN.
You are actually trading on MARGIN. Like I said, talk to a broker.
The fact is you're a ****ing idiot. You think you know by
observation, and your observation is incorrect. Google it if you
like. Call a broker. Call you mom. I don't care.

There are CASH accounts and there are Margin accounts. Most are
Margin. When you sell a stock in a CASH account, you cannot purchase
with the proceeds until it clears. In a Margin account, the brokerage
LOANS you the money after the sale and before the clearance.

Now, stop showing the whole group what a ****ing idiot you are and do
some ****ing research. ALL STOCK TRADES TAKE 3 DAYS TO CLEAR. Get it
through your ****ing retarded brain. ALL.


Unfortunately, what you're not grokking is that I'm not contesting
that the trading house specifies "3 days" to clear a transaction for
your account. What I *am* contesting is that of said 3 days that it
takes _them_ 3 days to do all of their processing, because the
technology exists (and is in use) to convert a physical check to an
electronic payment such that the physical receipt is no longer
required for the transaction to be completed.


A coast to coast check can easily take 5 days...

I’ve had international wires clear in less than 2 days.
But the ‘guarantee’ was as what you’re claiming

. They
build a buffer in for themselves ... and they can use this
buffer for their own gain.


That's a wire. I'm talking about a paper check issued from a
california bank and cashed in a bank on the east coast. A coast to
coast *check*. Jesus ****ing christ, how dumb are you?


For those banks that still haven't upgraded to electronic
transactions, they may still be required to ship the paper ... but
they're becoming the exception rather than the rule, and I'm referring
to where the banking technology has been heading for more than a
decade instead of the holdouts.

The reasons why banks are moving to electronic is because it reduces
their internal processing costs ... PLUS they may, if they so choose
(and are allowed to do so from a regulatory standpoint) use the
"float" for their own financial gain.



No one is holding your money. No one gives a **** about your dumb
****ing check. There are rules, and ALL banks follow them. It is a
process, and takes the time it takes.

It’s been automated. That’s why Charles Schwab
was able to offer no-fee trades.


Oh brother. You are one hopeless ****ing retard.


Who's learned from familymembers who work in the financial services.


As for the other bull****, I cut it off. If you're a diver, great.

Pics on my website, some of which I’ve shared on COLA.

I am not a diver.

Since you’re vouching for him, is Elon Musk one?


He's an engineer, as I said, and he made a mini sub. They teach the
three R's in this country?


I didn't ask if he was an Engineer: I asked if his qualifications
included scuba diving in the relevant overhead (e.g., cave)
environments and you've not answered that question.

Including with relevant overhead environment experience?
If not, he’s out of his area of expertise.


I think you're a jealous idiot. You identify more with the diver, and
would be happy to see Musk fail at anything. Why, I don't know. Some
people just hate to see others successful.


You've still not answered the question.

Musk's bad and unprofessional behavior reflects negatively on both him
as well as on his engineering profession.


But I am a little tired of the constant, I'm an expert in
this field bull**** that goes on here.

I typically post on that which I know. Go look at all the threads
I

m silent on /s

We both know that's bull****. You don't know about stock clearance or
bank clearance and yet you keep insisting you know. Clearly you don't
know. And with the world's information at your fingertips you still
don't know. Must be both lazy and stupid. So how the **** can I trust
you know anything about diving? So far, all you've shown me is that
you're an idiot.


Imagine the irony of bitching about another person supposedly being
lazy when you then fail to do any due diligence yourself. For
example, this pic from 1997 has been on my website for the past seven
(7) years, which is a pic of a staircase inside a shipwreck (an
overhead environment):
http://huntzinger.com/photo/1997/brac/19970928-10c.jpg

FYI, this particular shipwreck broke apart back in 2000 and rolled
semi-turtle, so the lighting on the above staircase got trashed; but
today I added the video from a 2010 dive when I was checking out the
video capabilities on my then- newest UW camera system, which shows
the semi-easy penetration into the overhead environment of the same
wreck; I believe that the same staircase is visible - although
approached from the other side - at the 0:50 mark:

http://huntzinger.com/photo/2010/brac/356L_960x540.m4v



The idea of the mini sub was that someone would guide it.... don't
see

how
it would have failed.

Well, it was a good idea if the entire route was underwater. But
it wa

sn’t.
As such, the mini-sub would have had to have been manhandled over
the dry sections, which was very rough terrain. Thats why Musk

s idea
would have failed.


As I said, the water was rising, and that's why the mini was built.


But even rising waters (which were a concern that the rescue would
have to be aborted) does not eliminate the dry sumps that the rescue
team was having to navigate through.


Now, the diver got them out, that's great. But he was an asshole
about


it. Sorry, but that is how it how it happened. Even if he was
right, a

nd
even if you are right, he didn't have to be an asshole about it.
And


you're still doing it now. Someone goes out of their way to build,
tes

t,
and offer their considerable help and resources. And what does he
get in return? **** on. That's the problem.

Incorrect. The rescue team didn’t know what Musk was doing unt

il
Musk held a flashy press conference. Musk didn’t try to coordi

nate
anything behind the scenes; he was nothing but an attention-seeking
egomaniac. He got called out as such and that’s when Musk star

ted
his lame Ad Hominem “pedo” attacks.


Said the jealous man...


Projection attempt.

Sounds to me like you and others just have a
whole lot of hate, and this causes irrational nonsense. You only see
one side of it. "pedo" was an asshole.


No, I merely recall the actual chronology of events.


FYI, the procedure they did use was a modified body recovery.


Great.


Which is actually quite important from a training & skills perspective
to make the rescue more likely to be successful. Even as it was, two
rescuers died.



The Tesla is the safest car ever made, and that's what the
industry is saying, not me.

Perhaps so, but let’s see the stats and including if it

s a too-small
sample size, and/or not properly normalized.


Not perhaps. It is. It's a fact. Go cry in your pillow or whatever.
Safest car ever tested, period.

In any event, the g-shock loading vulnerability is a relatively
recent


find; won’t know for awhile what it’s net risk contribu

tion will be in
electric car safety...but it is being currently applied to
understand


how/why for some of the seemingly spontaneous car fires.


Safest car ever tested, period.


Nope. Musk tried to make that claim and got slapped with a "Cease and
Desist" order from NHTSA:

https://www.businessinsider.com/elon...safety-nhtsa-2
019-8



-hh


What a douchebag.
Ads
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off






All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:10 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2024 PCbanter.
The comments are property of their posters.