bugzz

Before I learned to use vim (neovim), I used VSCode. I tried to use the vi emulator extension in VSCode, but found it difficult to use due to hotkey conflicts, like trying to do something in vim but it's already a VSCode hotkey that does something else. The "hassle" of setting up Neovim really isn't that bad, and I'm very happy that I've been able to set up a customized experience that's contained in a single dotfile.

> The further we go, the less real pain is, simply because our brain can't process and mirror it.

But from an ethical perspective, the pain of a random person is just as important, right?

> Animals look a bit like us and show similar pain reaction so we can emphasize somehow. But for everything after plants, we are getting too far.

Animals don't just show similar pain reactions - the biochemical pathways are the exact same. For me, I have to assume basic physical pain is nearly the same, at least for mammals. For plants I don't know. It's possible they have some pain, but I'd expect it to be very different and lesser. For computers I see no reason to think there's any physical pain (though perhaps in the future)

I feel like you have to believe at least one of these 3:

1) Life is just a chemical reaction, human sadness / happiness don't matter

2) Humans are fundamentally different than other animals - our pain is somehow more real than animal pain

3) Animal pain does matter.

Personally I favor 3)

Yeah, I think about this. So many small animals die in slow, painful ways (naturally - i.e. centipedes eating mice, preying mantises eating birds). Makes me wonder if eventually in the future there would be some moral prerogative to somehow tame the natural world

If you put only 20% down to buy it, that's 100k. So 20k/year is 20% returns, right?

Are the books any good? What are reviews like?

Do you happen to know what that logarithm book was?

what would stop them from using anonymous accounts to trade as well?

It's a property referencing the digits - thus "digital". The results hold for all bases, not just base 10.

It's never been found in an influenza virus in nature, but covid isn't an influenza virus. Is this never found in coronaviruses in nature?

For commuting to work, sure. But if you are going to get groceries for your family or buy anything large (furniture, TV, lumber, etc), it's very nice to use car.

For stocks I agree, but here tether isn't ever going to go much above $1, right? So the downside of shorting is just that it ties up a lot of capital, right?

But the value of bond investments will go down as the rates raise

2-3 weeks ago when share prices were around $17, GME had a market cap of less than 1.2B. WSB has 7.6 million users now, but I assume it went up a lot recently. Say 2 million of them bought some GME. To buy 50% of the shares a couple weeks ago it would have only taken $296 each. So they could ABSOLUTELY get prices moving significantly. Now of course lots more people have jumped on now. But that 20B volume number is after they got the price to ramp up!

One issue I've run into when I looked into strategies like this is that bonds have been an incredible investment over the last ~40 years. Sure, they haven't beaten the S&P500 straight up, but their volatility and max drawdown has been so good that you could have used leverage with them and gotten a portfolio that easily beats the S&P500 with as good or better volatility.

The problem for me going forward is that these returns for the last 40 years have been do to falling interest rates. Can the rates keep falling? A little bit more. Will they go negative like some other countries? Maybe? But at some point I have to wonder if this strategy is still viable.

Sure, but in finance it's not clean. It's not like one fund is getting 10% every single year and the other 7% every single year - there's high variability. The fund that'd underperforming may expect that the other fund's strategy is likely to blow up once every 20 years and thus not be worth it. It takes decades to get statistically significant results, and by then the world has changed.

> Interestingly that means you can trade an option with me and we can both make money.

Can you explain this? Maybe I just need an example to understand how this works

agreed, I thought of the same issue. Seems like there has to be some assumption about even difficulty of finding bugs / catching species of birds

Early on in the pregnancy the hormone levels are low and the line is faint. Obviously no one is saying a dark line is hard to interpret...

But wouldn't losing 9% of production reduce peak capacity as well?

Sure, and some of the rats are probably fine too. But it still skews studies...

cartel retaliation

why?

Huh? Doesn't your argument also mean that you'd expect nearly 100% to make money, or lose 0?

What platform do you trade on?

He's saying that traders don't just make 1 bet in their lifetimes though.

> I was also surprised to learn that S&P 500 earning shave been flat since 2014 while the market has gone gangbusters. That had to come crashing back to Earth eventually

I was also surprised recently to learn how flat earnings have been. The stock prices going gangbusters can be explained (at least partly) by earnings per share going up due to stock buybacks. If you go look, most companies have significantly fewer shares outstanding than they did in 2014.

As long as we are fairly confident about the specificity and sensitivity of the test, then it DOES tell us something, even if those numbers are as low as 85%.

Here's the flaw in your proof - If the test has 85% specificity, then the chance of 200 million positives is essentially 0% (you'd get ~150 million if no one really has the disease). Getting a result of 200 million positive means either you DO have a significant number of true positives (50 million), or your 85% number for specificity was wrong.

A huge factor here is time. 3 weeks ago I saw a bunch of people saying "Look, South Korea tested a lot of people, finding the majority of the mild cases, and thus only has a death rate of 0.5%". Since then, however, deaths/cases in SK has risen to 1.59%, and increasing daily. They don't have many new cases, what's happening is the cases from 3-4 weeks ago are dying.

Germany has tested a lot and found a lot of cases earlier in the disease progression. I'm sure their death rate will rise like S.K.'s did. Not all the way to the 8% - 10% we see in Spain and Italy, but I'd guess up to 2%.

Go check South Korea's numbers again. As their cases have resolved, death rate has steadily increased, and it's now at 1.33%. It will continue to rise. Same with Germany, it just takes time to die. South Korea had already found majority of their current cases 2-3 weeks ago, but deaths are only now picking up.

Edit: now 1.37%, up again since I checked a couple hours ago.

The same rise in death rate was observed way back when SARS happened. At first people estimated death rate at 2-3%, and it was continually revised upwards as cases resolved.