Gloomberb

3 hours ago (gloom.sh)

I really wish people would mention their stack when they have these curl install scripts. I'd rather use a real package manager, but I'm not totally against installing a compiled binary this way. I am, 100%, not going to install some Java/Type-script nightmare like this though. How is it resolving the dependencies? Is it installing some version of node, bun... on my machine? How's that working with other versions I have installed?

Related: please don't write command line tools in non-compiled languages! Don't make the runtime your user's problem.

  • I know where you're coming from. I've been worried about all the supply chain attacks on npm too. And I'm far from a security expert. However, if you're okay with installing binary packages via `curl somesite.com | sh` I don't think you are in a better position with regards to security.

Useful on its own merits.

Everybody who's distracted by the name and can't get past it, there's a thread developing here somewhere, where they're comparing it to Bloomberg.

  • 100% agree. It's a fun name, but it ends up begging the comparison. The look and feel of it was an instant download for me. It's actually exactly what I want and even tried / failed to build on my own for years. I'll be supporting this project.

  • Yeah, I think a few of the widgets here are neat and useful. It's not a Bloomberg replacement, but it might be a good replacement for a few tabs? You could get the info elsewhere, but I like this presentation more.

    Edit: Ah, they're offering a pro subscription. While I appreciate that cloud services aren't free, I'm not sure that I'm willing to pay to replace a few browser tabs. Not for me, but maybe for someone!

Yeah... people aren't paying Bloomberg $31,980 per year for a TUI. They're paying for the data source... and I don't think you have Bloomberg's connections.

  • Asked a dear friend in the finance industry what he thought about Bloomberg. He's the type of guy who uses these systems daily. Mostly paraphrasing:

      1) Bloomberg was lightyears ahead of anything else in the pre-internet days, so there's a lot of UI familiarity.
    
      2) Bloomberg's chat is important because, as a hedge fund or investment bank, the chat is how you buy and sell bonds. You agree to the trade in the chat, then tell the back office folks to execute the trade. Direct quote: "I'd wager 90% of the ~400 trillion in annual bond trading value happens over Bloomberg DM"
    
      3) Bloomberg is the biggest and best aggregator
    

    This is fascinating to be because I always assumed latency was the key. After all, the only Bloomberg terminal I've ever seen in person was hooked up to its own dedicated fiber drop. It seems like the chat and sheer breadth of data are the differentiators.

    • I've heard the same thing about Bloomberg's chat many years ago. Since everyone you're chatting to also has to fork over ~$30k/yr to use it, there's the implicit assumption that you're talking to a serious person.

    • really it's about quality of the data. it's like apple but for price data. it's correct, it just works. sure it has the goofy teletext interface, but if you need to pull accurate prices and historical market data that you can trust you will find it there and it will just work with a stable and learnable interface. moreover, network effects ensure quality.

    • It's really only a specific subset of traders that need close to zero latency. Many other finance professionals deal on larger timescales so it's not that big a deal. I am more "finance-adjacent" so I don't use Bloomberg personally but have worked on plenty of deals where "time sensitive" means "it has to get done this week. Oh wait, the bank hasn't finished its KYC checks yet. Okay, it definitely has to get done next week. Unless the KYC checks are still ongoing, in which case, for sure gotta get it done by the end of the month".

    • Bloomberg Terminal is for humans. It takes about 10 clicks to do a stock BUY. your average retail stock trading platform is much quicker, many have 1 click trading.

      The dedicated fiber drop was most likely for reliability, not for latency.

    • There is a marketplace on Bloomberg where you can buy and sell interesting stuff you don’t really find anywhere else. Some of it stored in freeports and delivered to your freeport, etc. top tier escorts, etc.

      1 reply →

  • Also, and in addition, the value of the Bloomberg Terminal is not the UI, it is the consistency. You don't pay for an accelerator and a break pedal, you pay for the 100% guarantee to find them in the place >100k people have been trained to find them.

  • > They're paying for the data source

    Yup.

    If you want fixed-income data, Bloomberg is the only shop on the street data-wise.

    If you want other financial data, Bloomberg's fixed entry-point pricing tends to make more sense in terms of bang for buck than its competitors modular price sheets.

    People saying Bloomberg is just about the chat are simply embarrassing themselves.

    Look at the price sheets of Eikon, Factset, CapIQ etc. There is no such thing as a cheap "Bloomberg killer".

    Quality data is expensive. So are the leased-lines it arrives at Bloomberg on. So is the data wrangling architecture.

  • Can't you just use a bunch of agents to extract financial statements from company websites the moment they are published? OK, no insider info but you can still do quick agentic fundamental analysis and decide which companies are interesting.

  • Financial companies are cutting down on the amount associates can bill the firm for a $30 dinner, and the time before they can have the firm pay for a $30 car ride home. They definitely wouldn't pay for Bloomberg if it could be easily replaced.

    • Bloomberg terminal is only $133/day (assuming 240 work days per year). So, while $32k/yr seems expensive at first glance, given the total annual cost of an analyst or trader, it's not huge. Of course, they'd rather not spend the $32k/yr if they could avoid it, if bloomberg can give you an edge on just one or two trades a year, you come out ahead. So...

      2 replies →

    • Skipping a dinner is not losing you much money.

      Making a bad trade or missing a good one due to delaying data or bad data can pay for several years worth of bloombergs for everyone in your firm in one moment.

    • Nobody ever got fired for choosing Bloomberg, even if there was a viable alternative there is no way anyone is pioneering the switch.

  • Many people pay the Bloomberg Terminal subscription ONLY for the chat. They don't use anything else from it.

  • > They're paying for the data source... and I don't think you have Bloomberg's connections.

    We keep seeing hundreds of Bloomberg competitors mimicking the interface and they always forget that the chat (with the connections), data and the newsroom are the reasons why Bloomberg's network effect is close to impossible to break.

    Using the Bloomberg Terminal is taught very early at colleges for any finance professional, which is how they get them as well.

    • I think it is more oriented towards retail investors (if anybody) than professional users. In theory it could compete with TradingView?

      (I’d especially love to see some federated social feature built in!)

  • I mean look at the name... this seems more like a fun quip than a product. I'm over here basking in the glow of dem vibes.

  • Some of us are just here for the æsthetics! Plus I already have the SEA100 "Centerboard" with chrome accents, and this will help complete the look.

  • actually a lot of data is not included in the standard bloomberg license and you have to pay extra (mostly passing through to the data vendors) to get access to it.

    There is not a single reason for Bloomberg’s dominance but the one feature that keeps people on it is the chat.

I don't think the finance field needs a better bloomberg, I think the whole interface and everything needs to be rethought. Part of the moat is the data, and data access. But I think we need to completely reimagine the terminal interface and interactions with the introduction of AI. The finance industry probably will be slow to adapt, but I genuinely think someone could completely disrupt 99% of the wall street businesses with an original idea.

  • My observation is that finance and banking and corporate functions high enough up the ladder operate more like a clubhouse than cutthroat businesses. You’d think all you need to do is make a better interface, but if you’re not part of the club, you’re not doing the business (or even getting shot at it).

Bloomberg's moat is the messaging service within it, not it's aggregation of data

  • People repeat this rhetoric all the time, but I promise you, finance professionals can and do easily migrate to other messaging platforms such as ICE chat. This isn't a moat for BBG

    • Evidence for this being that BlackBerry Messenger and even AOL Instant Messenger had various amounts of traction during the lifetime of Instant Bloomberg.

this looks neat, what's the data source and latency?

Interesting project, the view looks like gpui based interface, but source code say that it is web based interface written on typescript

An aside - do tools like this (or what it's modeling, the Bloomberg Terminal) really offer that much benefit to finance folks?

  • Here's an article. Basically if your trading stocks no. If you are trading different instruments or want interaction with the money folks (connections) yes. https://financetracked.com/bloomberg-terminal

    From it: "Bonds and Fixed Income: It provides the best data for interest rates and debt markets. Global Economics: It easily connects data from different countries, such as currency rates and government debt. The Chat Room: The messaging system is the industry standard. If you want to talk to the biggest players in the market, you often need to be on Bloomberg."

    • Depends a bit how you're trading stocks - bbg is still an extremely attractive data provider so I'd not dismiss them out of hand.

  • Bloomberg Terminal costs ~$24K per user per year, so the fact that people are paying for it implies it offers at least that much value. As mentioned elsewhere in the thread, most of that value lies in the data sources.

This post / OP really needs to say if it's AI SLOP or not and to what extent. This looks like AI slop.

  • Any "TUI" you've seen in the past few years is 100% vide-coded slop.

    • Curious what you consider those that aren't 100% 'slop', aside from the common ones.

      Because I'm starting to see the word 'slop' as a synonym for:

      "This person may or may not have used AI to build software and I don't like it"

What I pressume is the text for "Gloomberg" in the Hero header looks very fucked up

https://imgur.com/a/ssiKckF

Hopefully it's not intentional

When I see new software now, my first thought is an LLM wrote it and it makes me not want to use it. I also assume there are bugs and it’s not particularly feature-rich.

  • It is becoming very hard not to use an LLM. I have been working on a project all this year. I started doing everything by hand, and I am using LLMs a little bit more every day. I suppose we want to use projects that were crafted with care, whether or not LLMs were used. But it is not easy to figure that out. It reminds me. 30 years ago, before code formatters were popular, you could tell good code just by looking at how carefully formatted it was.

  • same and for some reason people are downvoting. why would we use vibecoded stuff with sensitive information?