matco11

We use uberconference (nothing to do with Uber!) in North America and Europe (multiple countries) and it works like a charm.

Well there is that, and also there is the superior accessibility of crash stats.

The Fabric app makes the crash stats very easily accessible to all the relevant people. You are one tap away from them on your phone.

With GA it takes so much more effort to navigate your way to the crash stats.

As a result you respond to issues much more quickly and decisively with Crashlytics. At least that was our experience.

Both her and George Michael died of heart attack.

With all technology/medicine advance it's incredible how many people heart disease still kills in 2016.

May Carrie and George Rest In Peace.

Technically, it would not brick the devices, because installed apps would continue to work. Only new installations for newly purchased devices would not be possible.

Nevertheless, I would agree it would be a stronger/harsher manouver by Apple.

Would it be a proportionate action to what Nokia is/has been doing? Well, maybe. Reading about Apple's side of the story, it seems Nokia has already crossed more than one line into harsh/unfair legal/business tactics. ...So, certainly it's hard to predict what Apple is going to do.

The interesting thing here is that if you assume that Withings is making $50-60mm/year in revenues (my guess - based on the $192mm sale price earlier this year on one side, and the estimated number of app downloads and the price of their devices), spread across so many devices, they are probably little/not profitable and little/not cash-flow generating.

So, if the assumption above is correct, Withings would be a small/insignificant casualty for the Nokia side, in the context of this patents war, where much bigger money is at stake.

There is a good correlation between the wealth of the parent and the wealth of the children in many countries, including the US.

In economics this is called "social mobility" and it is measured to analyze the success of economic and social policies, whereby, generally, it is considered that having a high social mobility index is a desirable thing in a country. That's because a country with high social mobility is a country where the American dream is happening more often...

Social mobility works both ways: in a country with high social mobility, it is more likely that a child will be much poorer, or much richer than the parents.

There is a paper by the OECD analyzing by how much different factors (family wealth, education, etc.) affect wealth of children across different countries: http://www.oecd.org/centrodemexico/medios/44582910.pdf

Your point 2) is not correct, I think. The article does not really say that: it says that high IQ is one of the drivers of wealth, but it is not a sufficient condition to determine wealth, because other factors are at play in a meaningful way.

The current title is still misleading as it overcorrected in the other direction: now it sounds like the doctors made a mistake.

If the word "innovative" sounds like inappropriate - which I am not sure why that would be the case, given this was a "first-ever" technique, at least "successfully" should be added in the title to avoid it sounding like there was a mishap.

Not writing down passwords made sense >20 years ago when the main threats you wanted to defend from were "local" because internet connectivity was not ubiquitous, and you would have only one password or two to manage...

In today's world with widespread internet connectivity and dozens of passwords to manage, password managers and/or writing down and (certain) dual factor identification approaches make more sense...

Well maybe you too should take your turn to back your claim with evidence!

I shop fast too. I get in and out as fast as I can, because - after all - the attendants in the store where I go to would not know a leaf of spinach from a leaf of kale...

The same applies to my electronics shopping...

...at least I can justify the guys there not knowing kale!

Jokes aside: not all stores are like that, and not all people shop like that.

I can think of many elderly people using shopping as a main daily source of social interaction.

Diversity means choice and choice is generally good.

I think the interesting point here is that when you remove social interaction and product advice from physical stores, then really you might as well only buy online... and Amazon is the king of online.

So this looks like a fantastic move by Amazon.

Woa! I wonder what this chart would look like for Amazon

Well, the answer really is in your question: consumers do vote with their dollars.

Except sport and other tv rights are an oligopolistic market (not a free competitive market): this allows cable companies to select bundles not in a way to minimize the cost to the consumer (which would result in you finding the perfect bundle for what you want to watch at the cheapest price), instead they can create bundles to maximize profit for themselves (which results in you having to pay for several bundles in order to get all the content you want).

Warren Buffett was referring to traditional (long-only) investment funds... He himself was for many years running a hedge fund (and had learned from the pioneers of hedge fund investing.)

https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2012-04-24/what-was-...

http://www.forbes.com/sites/randalllane/2012/03/26/warren-bu...

https://www.quora.com/What-was-the-fee-structure-of-Warren-B...

Signal acquired! https://twitter.com/esaoperations/status/788780512089432064

Key thought: AI's social and cultural impact, in other words AI's implications on "social mobility" (your rags to riches stories, the American dream).

The authors are asking: in a hypothetical world where many decisions are AI assisted, what is the risk that AI systems slow social change because they are too dumb to understand exceptions, peculiarities, positive externalities? What can we do to establish parameters that will allow us to know when a certain AI system is trained well enough to be used in real world, with minimal risk of undesired social and cultural implications?

Several countries offer tax schemes to support local movie productions: private investment in local movie production is incentivized by way of tax breaks to the investors.

I am not aware of equivalent tax breaks offered to investors to support science or technology development, it is seems to me it could be a great way to incentivize scientific progress.

Does anyone know why tax schemes to support science are not being used?

There is an interesting story by the New Yorker: "It wasn’t just that Nokia failed to recognize the increasing importance of software, though. It also underestimated how important the transition to smartphones would be. And this was, in retrospect, a classic case of a company being enthralled (and, in a way, imprisoned) by its past success. Nokia was, after all, earning more than fifty per cent of all the profits in the mobile-phone industry in 2007, and most of those profits were not coming from smartphones. Diverting a lot of resources into a high-end, low-volume business (which is what the touch-screen smartphone business was in 2007) would have looked risky. In that sense, Nokia’s failure resulted at least in part from an institutional reluctance to transition into a new era."

http://www.newyorker.com/business/currency/where-nokia-went-...

Well... yes... just remember to securely delete that backup made with the current version of iOS10 from your computer, after you upgrade to next iOS public release... ;-)

Here is what I think: the natural (black) truffle essence will dissolve in the oil exactly in the same way its artificial twin does (as you can ready in other comments in this thread the artificial and the natural essences are identical). That's how you make truffle oil at home yourself (if your priority is to make truffle oil, you will thinly slice the truffle before you add oil, if your priority is to preserve the (black) truffle, you will keep it whole).

Anyway it's generally a bad idea to preserve a truffle: if you get your hands on a great truffle you want to consume it as quickly as possible. If the truffle it's not great, when then do not waste your time and money on it... ;-)

What the article states is not true (but - at the same time - it's not false!): it's simple, you can buy "truffle oil" that does not contain truffle, or you can keep your eye sharp (and pay more) and buy oil containing real truffle (I have done both!)

Same applies to a lot of food out there. Here is a good example, olive oil: http://www.marksdailyapple.com/is-your-olive-oil-really-oliv...

Of course you can buy perfectly genuine, high quality, olive oil, you just need to know how to pick. The same applies to truffle oil.

The article is really saying that there are brands out there selling artificially flavored truffle oil (not a great surprise, if you ask me), and it fails to clarify a number of underlying premises it's making (or should be making). For example:

1) it is just not true that truffle is the most expensive food in the world. WHITE truffles are. Black truffles are a lot more common and a lot less expensive.

2) white truffle and black truffle are very different: not only they have a different taste, or grow in different geographies, but you eat them differently. For example you always only eat white truffle raw, while you usually cook black truffle. Truffles oil is normally made with black truffle, because the flavor of white truffle is hard to preserve in olive oil.

3) truffles are an underground mushroom. Like all mushrooms, there are many varieties (beyond the fact that they may be white or black), some are more flavorful than others. Their flavor is also affected by the type of tree they grew on (on the roots), which I think it's quite interesting.

4) black truffles grow in a handful of geographies around the world (the best ones are normally considered to be from France, Italy, or Spain), they last several days so they can be transported relatively easily

5) high quality white truffles come only from one - small -region in Italy, they last only 5-7 days from the moment they are picked and are difficult to transport (without making them spoil). The world's capital of white truffles is here (for October to December): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alba,_Piedmont

People spend huge sums for white truffles, some get bought for $30k, $40k or even $50k, which are even more astounding amounts, if you consider they are for a rock-like looking mushroom that will flavor one or two meals for you and will otherwise spoil in a few days...

Bonus fun trivia: truffles have not been successfully farmed, so they have to picked in the wild. Picking methods are different in different parts of the world: In France they normally use pigs to sniff truffles in the forests. Apparently one of the essences emitted by truffles is similar to sexual feromones in pigs, so they are naturally attracted to them and instinctively dig in the ground for them (but then the truffle picker has to pull The pig away before it the truffle gets eaten). In Italy, they use dogs. It takes years to train a dog to hunt for the smell of truffle (they told me 3-5 years is common), but then dogs do not eat truffles and when they find them, they carefully dig in the ground without breaking the truffle.

Official response from AH: http://a16z.com/2016/09/01/marks-offmark/

Good point. Also, I wonder if the mark-to-market policies of the various funds are really comparable.

When you have a public market price reference it's pretty much irrelevant, but with the majority of the portfolio in non-listed assets, mark-to-market policies could have a large impact on your paper returns.

Generally, you would look at the relative risk of different asset classes to define the relative return goal.

The relative risk would be a function of factors like the volatility of the asset class (the higher the volatility, the higher the return required), or the liquidity (the longer the money is locked-in, the higher the return required), etc.

Up until 10-15 years ago, it was common to refer to return targets for a certain asset class as a multiple of risk-free rate (what government bonds yield), eventually, when the risk-free rate started converging to zero, it became more common to refer to return targets as risk free rate + X.

So, for example, a simplified ranking from the lowest to the highest return could look like this: - government bonds - AAA-rate corporate bonds - US equities - international equities - risk-neutral hedge funds - macro hedge funds - private equity funds - real estate funds

Whereby you would have the first half of the list generating single digit yearly returns (say, 8% for US equities), and the bottom of the list generating double-digit returns (say, 15% for risk-neutral hedge funds and 20% for private equity). This is just an example - with realistic numbers.

One of the implications of the above is NOT that private equity investments are better than US equities, or real estate investments are better than hedge funds: they have different risks, so they have to deliver different returns in order to be EQUALLY attractive.

Also, consider that there are many types of hedge investing and private equity strategies, each with different risk factors and target returns.

Correlations are another important factor: they measure how the return of a certain asset class moves relative to the others (what happens to your returns when US equities returns are negative?)

In order to increase their assets, VCs have to justify to their investors the returns they target vs. the risks they ask their investors to undertake. That's not easy for all VCs.

the definition of impressive resume depends on the purpose you want to achieve. There is not such a thing as THE impressive resume.

If you are looking for a certain job, you don't want a resume with a bunch of empty titles. You need a strong resume addressing the specific requirements of that particular job, in terms of skills and relevant experience.

Large organizations need both people that take care of the "ordinary business" and people that take care of "special projects", that are the doers, that figure things out by themselves: your startup experience automatically qualifies you for all the activities that require this second type of people.

Why not simply disabling "back to my iPhone"? I question its value against theft - thieves these days know about taking your device offline. Sure, it is useful if you forget your phone somewhere, but how often does that happen?

It seems the intrinsic risk of attack you expose yourself to by having "back to my iPhone" enabled is greater than the risk of forgetting your iPhone somewhere...

Yes, Apple gives you static backup codes

It works here

Considering that 1) the revenue base of ARM is predominantly in USD licensing fees, and 2) that the British pound has lost ~20% against he dollar. The ~41% premium is really a 21% premium. No chance a global leader like ARM could have been snatched for a 21% premium a few weeks ago.

Run a list of companies listed in London with predominantly non-GBP revenue base and you have a great list of takeover targets.

German corporate governance laws require a parent company to operate at arms-length for ownership levels between 50%+1 and 95%.

This means no changes of management allowed, no revenue synergies, no cost synergies. By acquiring the remaining shares, they would be allowed to take actual control.

The higher the income, the higher the impact of non-primary devices is (simply, because with higher income you have more secondary devices)

His point was not to compare US and UK.

His point was that miles driven on freeway (when you are using Tesla's autopilot) seems less dangerous than miles driven everywhere else.

He found the UK data and wonders if the same applies to the US. The implication is that if it did, then Tesla would be comparing apples with oranges in its 100m miles reference.