Comments by "J Hutt" (@jhutt8002) on "Patrick Boyle" channel.

  1. Indeed, Patrick mentioned that Nick Leeson was never truly well investigated about his trades, until it all collapsed, even it should have been obvious something was going on. Also, Patrick omitted about Kerviels lawsuit, that he was able to get sentence of having to pay his massive losses back upturned, he DID NOT had to pay anything back. This was because initially he was making massive profits, that he worked to hide, but even with that court ruled it wasn't believable Societe Generale was unaware of risks involved due to amount of profit Kerviel was making, so they saw bank themselves partially responsible.
    4
  2. I've always wondered how it is possible there's so massive amount of research globally done, and it always seems to bring some meaningful results. Common sense tells we should be far ahead in technology by now with all that ground breaking research published all the time. Well. Now I know.
    3
  3. Nokia never figured out how their users would actually use their phones. I don't know that much about their high end, as I didn't had money nor incentive for such phones back then, but their middle and low end, (after the days of monochrome screens that is. In those days they were the best!) were all pretty useless one-size fits all devices, with terrible OS. I always wanted to stick with Nokia, but they didn't any model that could have held up in forest work I did back then (since 5100, which had those crappy screens that broke down within couple of years). 6110 navigator was also pretty great but had terrible keys (another sin of almost every Nokia phone since moving to larger screens) and was really hard to balance in your hand with it's heavy top and square shape. They never also never got Symbian to work smoothly, so I understand the reasoning for jumping to MS. They should have went with Android, but no one could have known it to become that succesful back then.
    2
  4. Wait... Beads were used as money due to shortage of coinage in american colonies. Doesn't this technically mean, colonists weren't buying indian land for beads to fool them, like we see in popular history, but trading actual money they expect to lose value in the future to real estate they expect to rise in value?
    1
  5. This whole saga of FTX is like a some mid tier tv series that just grows more and more unintentionally ridiculous and unbelievable deeper you go into it...
    1
  6. Honestly, not buying Google in 90's/ early 2000's is very understandable decision. I remember search engines back then, and Google was always the best, because it didn't have those banners of ads blasting at you and slowing down your access. It was obviously better at it's job as well. However, I always thought it was a hobbyist site and jut a basic tool with no intention to make any money. How they could have, without prominent ads or affiliated links? Their business model didn't exist back then, and honestly I'm still not exactly sure, how they made money before their adservices branch and sold top spots in search (which hadn't really been viable business strategy until they were big enough)
    1
  7. ​ @DominikPlaylists  Banks are too rich. Back when customer service mattered they where mostly local, and needed their good reputation. Björn Wahlroos, Chairman of the Board of biggest bank in the nordics once famously said that regular customer only brings in dirt on their floor.
    1
  8. Plenty of movies are still shoot on film. And they all should. You just can't replicate that feel with digital cameras
    1
  9.  @shawnconway6009 Obviously they're all transferred to digital, but shot on the film, it still looks like film.
    1