bidirectional

What % of people alive can do either? We have a system which beats the vast majority of humanity.

How is GPT-4 not AGI? It is generally intelligent and passes the Turing test. When did AGI come to mean some godlike being that can enslave us? I think I can have a more intellectualy meaningful conversation with ChatGPT than I could with the vast majority of humanity. That is insane progress from where we were 18 months ago.

Clubs' spending must be tied to their revenue, foregoing sponsorship money would force them to spend less no matter what, and there's a continuos arms race to spend more and more.

Also, practically all football club ownership is a loss-making activity.

What stage of denial is this?

The US government gets to pay x% interest because they can theoretically always service a debt denominated in USD. Every other borrower in USD pays (x+y)%, where y amongst other things represents the risk that they will default.

Can you name a single form of analysis which a human can employ but would be impossible to program a computer to perform?

Can you tell me if a program which searches for counterexamples to the Collatz conjecture halts?

Turing's entire analysis started from the point of what humans could do.

Fund managers at a Swedish pension firm don't have yachts. The teachers/train drivers/policemen etc. they manage pensions for definitely don't.

So did the depositors who exceeded the limit for FDIC insurance.

> Even something as broad as 'buying and holding an index fund' beats almost all funds and strategies.

How do you come to believe something so blatantly false and naive? Is this due to the proliferation of the (good) advice that most Americans are best off saving for retirement in index funds?

Why? Loads of private investment funds beat indices.

Where is the money skimmed from the retail investor there? They beat the NBBO?

Lean supports coinduction, which allows you to write programs which run indefinitely. This even allows you to embed Turing-completeness, it just has to be declared as potentially non-terminating up-front.

https://strathprints.strath.ac.uk/60166/1/McBride_LNCS2015_T...

User-approval isn't the only metric by which features are judged. No one liking it was obvious as there's no user benefit. If it results in increased revenue/recurring users/valuable ad displays, that's different.

Are any of those workable on a phone?

Tether is not backed by crypto so why would crypto market losses affect it? They publicly state what their assets are and how much they're worth. People just think they're lying for whatever reason.

Why? They may have acted reckless up to now with the commercial paper etc. but unless they have taken massive losses and somehow covered them up, they can just convert to risk-free assets and take the yields.

Why would they? Tether said they had commercial paper, so it's not some mind-blowing revelation and they'd be risking their job by doing so.

Why would they? They're now in an incredible position -- convert everything to treasuries and yield over 4%.

By definition they would never have assumed zero defaults when buying the paper, just few enough defaults for other gains to offset them.

You don't need to trade with an intermediary in the commercial paper market, companies could directly issue the paper to Tether, no one would ever know about it. They could then reduce their holdings to zero by holding the paper to maturity and buying treasuries with the proceeds. By definition this being commercial paper means it would take just months to do this.

Yes, you need to not run away as soon as a non-alphanumeric symbol is used. That's hardly even mathematical notation.

Odd how you've been downvoted when what you say is true of literally the first item on the list...

I don't think that is in the spirit of this list at all, no matter how good it may be. This is about seminal papers advancing the state of the art in the theory of programming languages.

I'm not American, I'm British and feel as though our approach to healthcare is hobbled by people who think the NHS is some saintly miracle and not a very expensive bureaucracy which provides mediocre value for money.

The article itself relates the story of nachos being invented in Texas in the 40s.

Can you explain at a high level what you think a valid LC-in-LC interpreter looks like then? Because it's very hard to understand what your objection is to the examples in this thread.

If you built or created something that other people like (i.e. will pay for), you could probably get a way better 10 year ROI than you would in the market.

Why is 'the market' the only benchmark worth comparing to? For many investors it is too volatile, they can take worse performance if the chance of major drawdowns is reduced.

Ackman said hell was coming, was appropriately hedged using instruments which would appreciate when hell did indeed come, and made $2bn on his hedge which offset the losses in his equity positions. He didn't net profit $2bn.

That's a legal principle which exists because of the incredibly high bar we want our governments to cross before they deprive people of their liberties. Individual citizens can believe whatever they want to believe.