> Who do you think they are buying the shares from? It literally directly puts money in the pockets of investors.
He's trying to explain to you why stock buybacks don't "literally directly put money in the pockets of investors". If your shares are sold back to the company as part of the buyback you are 1) no longer an investor obviously, and 2) have not realized any gains as a result of the buyback. Investors who did not sell see their shares appreciate, which is different from "putting money in their pockets"
Seriously? You’re going to defend someone’s complete lack of understanding of market dynamics by making a pedantic stand that someone who sold their shares no longer qualifies as an investor?
Well for one, that presupposes that investors sell all of their shares at the same time, which they rarely do. So, I have 100 shares and I sell 10 back to the company. I receive 10 shares worth of cash directly from the company and I still have 90 left thus qualifying me as an investor under your definition.
And secondly, your entire premise is absurd. By your definition, a dividend isn’t a company returning cash to investors because by the time they issue the dividend, it’s no longer their cash, it’s the investors.
You guys just don’t understand this stuff. The real world just doesn’t work the way you imagine it.
> Can you answer the question "who gets money literally put in their pockets as a result of a stock buyback?"
The investors who sold the shares to the company. Markets aren’t some magical entity that conjure shares out of thin air.
If a company buys back 10 shares, they buy those 10 shares back from an investor who wants to sell 10 shares. That investor now has cash literally in their pocket.
How do you think this stuff works? Where do you think the money goes when companies spend on buybacks?
The investors who sold shares to the company did so at the then-current publicly traded share price. I bet they wish they didn't since the stock value increased after the sale. These investors who sold did not benefit from the sale any more than they would have selling on the open market in a non-buyback situation. Hope that makes it clear!
This is very naive, in incorrect. The stock market goes up on average…investors know this. When they sell it’s usually because they need cash, or they believe there is a better use for their capital. Most people who sell stocks do so knowing that it will continue to go up.
This also has nothing to do with returning cash to investors. They were going to sell the stock anyway. Who cares if it keeps going up? It has nothing to do with the mechanics of a buyback.
> These investors who sold did not benefit from the sale any more than they would have selling on the open market in a non-buyback situation.
What in the ever loving Christ? Why does this matter? You guys just keep moving the goal posts. This simply doesn’t matter and I’m not sure why you guys get hung up on it. Shareholders love buybacks. Why does HN think they have figured something out that millions of other people have missed. It gets so tiring going in circles.
• Digital Protocols: I2C, SPI, UART, USB. Comfortable with oscilloscope/logic analyzer, USB packet analyzer, Wireshark
• Web Technologies: React, MobX, Electron, Vue.js
• Database: Sqlite3, Postgres, MS SQL Server
• Mobile/Embedded Platforms: Embedded Linux including Raspberry Pi (and other Linux capable ARM-based SBCs), Arduino, Bare-metal Rust and C, RTIC, FreeRTOS, Android
◦ Developed first embedded Rust Peripheral Access Crate (PAC) for RISC-V based ESP32-C3
• Infrastructure & Tooling: Docker, Illumos LX Zones and bhyve, OpenAPI
• Reverse Engineering: Comfortable reverse engineering network protocols using Wireshark, binary analysis using IDA Pro and Ghidra, familiar with strace, dtrace, truss
Is that not what the author is referring to?
From the readme of his LiteDIP project[1]: "Plug-and-play LiteX-based IP blocks enabling the creation of generic Linux
drivers. Design your FPGA-based SoC with them and get a (potentially upstream-able) driver for it instantly!"
I built a descriptor block into a FPGA design about 15 years ago, this was for PCI so I could put it at a fixed offset into the BAR for every device.
I don't see how the "get a (potentially upstream-able) driver for it instantly" would work. Someone would still need to write a driver, you just get a way to probe for whether to attach it or not.
Sorry about that, the project is still very early. Check out the fan_wip branch for actual code.
The point of LiteDIP is to provide both the IPs, and their drivers.
Also, rather than needing IPs to be located at a certain address in any sort of bus (PCI BARs, wishbone, ...), litedip exposes the list of IPs starting at address 0 along with their version and relative address.
The driver then lists these blocks, and either has a driver for this block's version or not.
> A few community members have been working on a RethinkDB integration with Meteor and Volt, and we expect robust integrations to become available in the coming months.
If I'm understanding correctly, RethinkDB could be a drop in replacement for mongodb? What are the benefits to this replacement in the context of Meteor?
If you're a meteor user you probably wouldn't notice the differences early on because livequery does a phenomenal job abstracting all the hard work away. However, we anticipate two advantages in the later stages of app development.
Firstly, as the app scales, livequery has to work harder and harder. I don't know how good its scalability is at the moment, but I think it would be very hard to approach the scalability of the feeds built into the database.
Secondly, as we build feed support into more and more queries, you'll be able to get functionality unavailable in livequery, which will allow building more sophisticated realtime experiences than currently possible.
We're going to find out how all these components work together in practice in the next few months. I'm really looking forward to that!
> Who do you think they are buying the shares from? It literally directly puts money in the pockets of investors.
He's trying to explain to you why stock buybacks don't "literally directly put money in the pockets of investors". If your shares are sold back to the company as part of the buyback you are 1) no longer an investor obviously, and 2) have not realized any gains as a result of the buyback. Investors who did not sell see their shares appreciate, which is different from "putting money in their pockets"