back to article This bot shorts stocks when Trump tweets (don't fret, the profit is used for good)

US President Donald Trump's tweets about Boeing, General Motors, and Toyota have affected the companies' stock price – and creative agency T3 believes that consequence will be repeated. So the self-styled think tank created the Trump and Dump Bot to profit from presidential tweet-lashings. The bot shorts stocks based on the …

  1. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Not very future-proof...

    There are number of things could happen that would completely derail this product:

    1. Trump deactivates his personal Twitter account.

    2. Jack Dorsey deactivates Trump's personal Twitter account.

    3. Trump tweets that he's going to audit the Fed.

    4. Trump's account gets hacked, and starts posting confidential, unredacted intelligence reports.

    In any case, the stock market is going to crash eventually, making the app useless.

    1. HausWolf

      Re: Not very future-proof...

      This is probably not a long term app anyway as the odds makers do have trump not finishing his 1st term, let alone going for 8.

      And at the very least, something good is coming from his middle of the night temper tantrums.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Not very future-proof...

        The "odds makers" also predicted he wouldn't win the election so I wouldn't rely on anything they say.

        1. Marshalltown

          Re: Not very future-proof...

          If you check the numbers, Trump lost the popular vote with numbers almost precisely as predicted. What they didn't bank on was the Electoral effect which can be bassackward to the actual voting.

          1. Trigonoceps occipitalis

            Re: Not very future-proof...

            @ Marshalltown

            So after some 200 years of predicting US Presidential elections the pollsters have not yet realized that he is not directly elected and that there is an Electoral College. No wonder they got BREXIT so wrong.

            1. Marshalltown

              Re: Not very future-proof...

              Polls haven't been "predicting" anything for 200 years. And a loser of the popular vote has been elected before four times: 1824, 1876, 1888, and 2000. That last bit seems to be ignored generally ignored, and I believe also that the electors are not constrained to reflect the popular vote, and more than once they have not. The electoral college was established as a check on raw democracy - i.e., protect the states with small, rich populations from those with big poor ones - in short the ante bellum slave states. Effectively the vote of a citizen of a smaller state is weighted more than if they live in California or New York. Back in the day, it allowed every slave state extra power, and as the country expanded westward, the rural farming states acquired that same biased power. It still offers an extra edge to states with small populations, mostly the "red" states, who now also tend to be poor, religious, and rural. Curiously, decades ago the USSC ruled that while the country could be run that way, the states can't be. In California while representatives were elected on a "one man one vote" assumption, each county also elected two senators to the state government, providing the same area weighted bias for rural counties in the senate, which offset the urban weight given to the state house of representatives. The Supremes said that had to stop - one man one vote was the rule, except in the US Government which has a built in bias in the constitution.

    2. Stumpy

      Re: Not very future-proof...

      4. Trump's account gets hacked, and starts posting confidential, unredacted intelligence reports.

      I'm pretty sure his account wouldn't need to get hacked in order for him to start posting confidential, unredacted intelligence reports ... that's probably why he's excluded the Director of Intelligence from his everyday cabinet meetings, you know, just to reduce the chance that he might get hit by temptation.

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Not very future-proof...

      > 1. Trump deactivates his personal Twitter account.

      People who tweet at 3am are attention addicted and will not deactivate their accounts.

      > 2. Jack Dorsey deactivates Trump's personal Twitter account.

      And why would they turn away such an attention hog? Even if Trump got really bad, it would be a temporary deactivation at most. Trolls are the key to Twitter's relevance.

      > 3. Trump tweets that he's going to audit the Fed.

      That would probably kill all stocks, so short everything if that happens. Either way the bot works.

      > 4. Trump's account gets hacked, and starts posting confidential, unredacted intelligence reports.

      And how could you tell that wasn't Trump? So far he has said things that should not be said about foreign allies, and fellow major powers. Would someone believe it, if Trump starts tweeting US sub movements in the South China Sea?

      The ship of state leaks, and no state leaks more the US. But given the shear amount of real and alleged leaks, how can any of it be trusted? Even Wikileaks often gets caught up in the hype, and posts publicly released documents as "leaks".

      1. allthecoolshortnamesweretaken

        Re: Not very future-proof...

        "People who tweet at 3am are attention addicted and will not deactivate their accounts."

        ... and that's probably the one predictable thing about DJT.

    4. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Not very future-proof...

      The first two scenarios might just save the World.

  2. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Ummmm...

    Is Trump on on this, because if so....

  3. as2003

    Animal cruelty?

    If you're going to donate your profits to charity, wouldn't the ACLU be a much more appropriate recipient of said funds?

    1. the Jim bloke

      Re: Animal cruelty?

      ACLU will probably be the target - sorry, subject- of one of the evil clowns executive orders.

      They keep telling lies and spreading fakenews about people not having to agree with el prez..

      At least the puppies should be a safe charity to associate with for a couple of months yet.

      1. allthecoolshortnamesweretaken

        Re: Animal cruelty?

        "At least the puppies should be a safe charity to associate with for a couple of months yet."

        Can't be sure until we really know what that thing he's wearing on top of his head actually is.

        1. Rich 11

          Re: Animal cruelty?

          Can't be sure until we really know what that thing he's wearing on top of his head actually is.

          Careful now. Big John will be on to you for a remark like that, denouncing you as a hypocritical pantywaist liberal who hates freedom.

  4. John Smith 19 Gold badge
    Thumb Up

    "Trump n Dump."

    Like it.

    Just a word of reminder that 3 out of the 4 Presidents who've been murdered "forcibly retired" were Republicans.

    1. Colin Millar

      Re: "Trump n Dump."

      plus 1 out of the 1 presidents that resigned before the feds came knocking

      Paddy Power impeachment odds currently 11/4 first term, 6/1 first six months

      1. Arctic fox
        Joke

        @Colin Millar RE: "Paddy Power impeachment odds currently 11/4 first term"

        Given that for him to realistically avoid impeachent in his first term he would have to keep his mouth shut for the next four years I would offer 4/11 odds on!

  5. John Smith 19 Gold badge
    Coat

    "Paddy Power impeachment odds currently 11/4 first term, 6/1 first six months"

    Practically money in the bank?

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like