It was all selected by automated strategy in 2014. This one was built by looking for particular price signals, inside a market cap range, with a favorable ratio of insider buys vs sells or option exercises.
11,987 karma · joined June 10, 2010
You should really take a look at the 10 year stock price history of UNH. It's price is up around 650%. IBM has gone up 12% in that same time. Gold metal up 60%.
UNH is the third highest earning issue I have in this 10 year old strategy test portfolio beat out only by NOW and MPWR.
This strikes me as an overzealous internal response by the content team who otherwise doesn't know what to do with any of this. Since they're publicly traded all of this information is required to be in SEC reports anyways.
Why?
> all these laws do is put Western companies at a tremendous disadvantage
While attempting to address a serious problem. You could say this of any law.
> compared to Chinese ones.
Not a standard I care about or am willing to be held hostage to. Moral sacrifice to capture international business is pretty gross. Probably why it wasn't even hard to pass the law.
If wonder if we'll eventually improve genetic and blood testing to the point where everyone can have customized daily information to help them make the best individual choice.
It's the Scopes trial.
Weird that people still get raped and murdered in your "safe and stable" environment. Sometimes the perpetrators don't even see justice and get away with their crimes. How do you account for that?
> a certain amount of cherry-picking
Without a doubt. I don't trust authority because I've been abused by it before. I'm sure you didn't mean to punch down but that's how many of us would rationally perceive it.
What do you base this assertion on?
> so this seems pretty irrelevant to whether there's a discontinuity in the first place
Have you proven there is one? Or are you just saying "sleep is really weird so that must be a 'conscious discontinuity.'" I'm pointing out the obvious flaws in this logic.
> you're just saying there may be multiple during a given night's sleep.
No, you're saying that, and I'm asking you to define it.
Yet you dream and can remember your dreams. Your dreams can be influenced by things occurring around you in your sleep. Some people do this on purpose and find that they are more reliably able to do it with practice. So how are you defining "discontinuity?" I don't see one at all.
> arising from a copy of your brain on first "restart".
You're rather certain of the semantics of something that does not exist and that you haven't described any sort of process for. What if you can initiate a copy while I'm awake? Am I required to be asleep or sedated into an artificial coma in order to make this copy? Why is that so? Are my short term memories excluded? Is my stomach equally full? Do I have the same wounds? Do I need to pee?
> So how do you reconcile this discontinuity?
How do you explain sleep walking? Or narcolepsy. In your model of discontinuities?
Other than production itself. I was assuming that was our starting point. The TFA mentions some sources but does not limit exposure to only these indirect sources, nor does the EPA study.
> but exposure over a long time does increase cancer risk and fatality risk
Which is relative to the actual industry. The plants where formaldehyde is produced is likely highest in danger. It's also somewhere that you can easily see some changes in production process could actually measurably save whole numbers of lives within the next decade.
Likewise since it's produced and added intentionally to glues and finishes it's entirely possible it could be eliminated from the supply chain particularly in products that diffuse it out poorly before reaching the customer. Where not possible the products could be held and treated in such a way to extract and filter out the compound.
It's just weird to go "well.. the first world apparently requires human sacrifice" especially in the face of so many options. Anyways.
Ultimately, though, probably just going to end up using robots. These typically aren't highly skilled labor positions.
output: dependencies
<command(s) that use dependencies to create output>
Of course we do. It would just reduce profits. Individual workers accept these risks under the hope that they can eventually improve their or their families lot in life.
It's a lifesaving treatment. People usually don't bother themselves with frugality in either price or expertise at this point; although, I'm glad you can have this high confidence in your General Practitioner and his schedule.
> Also most people's deductable isn't 15k
The question is "why don't we just vaccinate people?" So while you're saying is true you're actually validating my point. The cost difference is not noticeable to most people and the cost of just the pre exposure vaccine is pretty high to begin with.
> its basically impossible to Google medical prices in America
No, it's entirely possible, because customers discuss these things openly and you can find those discussions. You can't establish an exact price that has any predictive power but you can establish a common range. It's not as if this is some mystery that only the Gnostics can tame.
Perl was created by someone in their spare time away from their day job.
When he needed money he just wrote books and charged for those. Ironically the publisher of those books hired him to continue working on the _language_, and of course, write more books.
Makes total sense.
Vaccines are for pre exposure. Google suggests the total cost of this service is between $1,500 and $3,000.
Medical treatment is for post exposure. Google also suggests the total cost of this service is around $15,000 as it typically includes an ER visit.
> What if the test isn’t 100% accurate?
They take the animal and dissect their brain so that it is as accurate as it possibly can be.
> We give rabies shots to dogs and cats constantly, why do humans have to jump through hoops to get it?
Different legal standards for the quality of product and different market sizes. Your dog and cat is taking a bigger risk with the product than we expect you to. Your vaccine is inactivated virus and offers stronger protection. The animal vaccine can be a modified living virus or a recombinant vaccine and offers weaker protection. Your dog and cat is probably legally required to have one and you are not.
> I got it about 10 years ago
It's not a permanent vaccine, is it?
By how much? 1%, 5%... or? It's measured so what's the measurement?
> and parking in them is in fact illegal
And all you have to prove this is a snapshot. Which are not accurate and is the basis for the entire thread here. And people who didn't commit any crime have been charged. So there is clearly an open question as to how many of these pictures appear to be illegal versus how many actually are.
> so why the air quotes?
Those are actual quotes and you've projected your assumptions into my actions. Did it harm your ability to understand what I wrote? If not then why make an issue of it?
Should call this site "embarrassed hacker propaganda." At least then you'd "have a leg to stand on." What a gross tactic you've relied on here.
Even if we could the brain is an amazingly efficient mechanism for computation. It uses such a low amount of power that it's hard to imagine a computer based AI model ever genuinely competing with it.
If the environment and entropy are human scale concerns than AI is decidedly a dead end for us.
Consciousness not a single isolated process and describing a lull in activity as "shutting down" is incorrect.
> So, each morning is a copy of you wakes up?
Obviously not. Many of these processes also happen in reverse when you are awake. So when I go to sleep I'm tired and in a different mood. When did that "copy" get made exactly?
> Or do you draw a line in the sand and say that is different.
You can easily ask "how much of my conscious state is controlled by my body's chemical state?" If that's a non trivial amount then simply copying and hoisting my memories into a different body is clearly going to have a non trivial impact. To the extent that it's easy to say "that would not be /me/."
Like creating useless bus lanes? Then creating useless programs to write tickets to those "parked illegally" in bus lanes? Then creating useless digital waste finding a "better way" to write these pointless tickets over a pointless lane?
> The key is still to launch fast
The key is to get rid of things that don't work and can't provide worthwhile value to the _majority_ of tax payers.
How many developers does the project have? What is your metric for "biggest?" Just total number of contributions?
> You're complaining that the developers of QEMU themselves
Yep. Do any of them work for any commercial companies? Or are we ignoring that to make an argument of appeals? If they all left would QEMU have zero developers?
> because they think it'll work well for them?
Looking at the set of challenges presented at the bottom of the email and their wiki I'm not sure this idea is well founded. There are more wacky compromises listed than there are good ideas.
If you're just going to push hacks upstream and maintain vendor forks downstream then why wouldn't you just start a new project and bring in whatever bits of C code you need until you can replace them.
I've yet to these efforts actually reduce baggage or show any hope of showing returns on investment inside of a decade of insane effort, which always seems to hamper any further feature or bugfix development, out of fear of interrupting other agonizing "works in progress."
Some of this think this is clearly goofy and can't help but comment on it.
DNA can conform to a simple helix but it's absolutely not stored or utilized in that conformation in vivo. DNA also adopts a diverse array of particular _local_ configurations based upon it's own electro-chemical gradients combined with those of the cellular environment it inhabits.
> Many ribozymes cleave co-transcriptionally and so cannot be purchased outright as RNA, otherwise they may cleave upon deblocking and/or dissolving in buffer.
That's kinda funny. Also part of the reason RNA world looks so convincing.
It's optimized for profit. Ideally these would be one in the same. In any case our productivity is easily an order of magnitude greater today than it was 100 years ago. The lack of technical progress into our legislatures and courts even though we currently poses the ability to afford the same order of magnitude improvements is a curiosity and implies there's a form of corruption that's taken root. This seems to allow non productive companies to command most of the profits.
> a harder time focusing and accomplishing things
Relative to self reports? The grass was probably greener and the schools were definitely better too. You might as well note that jobs have not gotten any more complex nor opportunities any wealthier in that time. People still flip burgers and sling french fries for minimum wage. They used to goof off out back now they troll the internet in their off moments.
> isn’t enough to fully protect one’s attention and intention.
Outer space is super exciting. Until people realize it takes months to make it even just to Mars. Our attention span was never that great to begin with.
It can be. You've just noticed the fact that for publicly traded companies where the value of the stock exceeds the total value of the assets you actually get to put that difference on your books into categories like "Good will" or "Consumer confidence."
For companies struggling to create genuine year over year value this is a currently validated mechanism for faking it. The majority of companies do not need to do this. That companies operating in monopolized sectors often have to do it is what really should be scrutinized.
That's the best exit case for the shareholders. It's the worst case for Intel's employees, customers and partners.
> would probably co-sign on it for national security concerns
This is equally laughable and detestable at this point in history. My personal security is not impacted by this at all. Weapons manufacturers honestly should not have a seat at this discussion.
> overriding the fact that it creates an absolute monopoly on x86 processors.
Yet this isn't a problem for "national security?" This is why I find these sentiments completely ridiculous fabianesque nonsense.