tanderson92

That's not yet proven, especially if IRC was a viable (open) technical stack to build on top of. Your argument also applies without modification to the following excerpt from Wikipedia:

> The classic example of rent-seeking, according to Robert Shiller, is that of a feudal lord who installs a chain across a river that flows through his land and then hires a collector to charge passing boats a fee (or rent of the section of the river for a few minutes) to lower the chain. There is nothing productive about the chain or the collector. The lord has made no improvements to the river and is not adding value in any way, directly or indirectly, except for himself. All he is doing is finding a way to make money from something that used to be free

Soros' position in the market doesn't necessarily express an opinion that Lyft is going to lose value. He is being paid by Icahn to facilitate the transaction, and so a reasonable goal, that he apparently pursued, is to minimize exposure while pocketing the transaction fees.

Exactly. And as for why Icahn wants to sell -- well, he's a pre-IPO investor and might not want to stick around to settle for a public market price in 6 months when there is also possibly demand for Uber shares.

The loophole that Soros and Icahn used is like being able to say you never cheated on your wife because you did so (cheated on your girlfriend) before the wedding ceremony and not since.

You should already have a full backup of your (private) RSA key anyway on an encrypted USB drive in a desk drawer somewhere, so you use that until you can provision a new Yubikey.

Why do you not differentiate the interests, and hence credibility, of a perpetual trust and corporate-owned news organizations?

As discussed elsewhere in this thread (search my nick), "no one" refers to frontrunning as encompassing both legal and illegal cases except the author of the definitive textbook on market microstructure.

In fairness, it's a very Harris-y kind of chapter which cuts against how you might want to understand or talk about front-running with people outside the industry. (off topic: having met the guy I'm not at all surprised by how he constructs this chapter or the book in general -- which I love).

FWIW, I have a copy of Harris' book on my desk right now and every explicit citation of Harris in Khan & Lu's paper appears to be accurate--supported by the text in Harris (Chapter 11).

edit: > But that's basically the fundamental challenge of shopping a large block; it implies that essentially all of institutional trading is "about" frontrunning. That can't be right.

That doesn't make the Khan & Lu definition wrong, just that there is a lot of "front running" that occurs. Larry Harris even explicitly mentions this point:

"When large traders recognize that they cannot trade as well as a professional trader can, they commonly hire a professional to help them trade. They may hire a block broker to act as their agent, or they may ask a block dealer to facilitate their trades. Block dealers who facilitate their customers' trade trade their blocks at uniform prices. The dealers then try to profit by trading the block in the market at a better average price. In a sense, block traders are front runners whom large traders hire to help them solve their trading problems"

This is related to the idea of sunshine trader discussed earlier in the chapter before that blockquote.

In even succint-er Levine-y terms: its not about fairness, it's about theft.

If Capitalism is ownership and control by individuals, and socialism is ownership and control by workers (but not via their collective will as expressed through democratically-determiend state action), then what is Norway?

I guess if you define "socialism" in a sufficiently narrow way you can ensure that no existent successful country will meet the chosen definition, a clever rhetorical trick.

I used this too, it was great and works flawlessly. I found the author's reasoning unconvincing (and not really argued at all).

I understand your critique much better (and agree more), thanks for clarifying.

> The industrialized countries are already so poor that the birth rates are so low they are rapidly going extinct.

Country wealth and birth rates are not positively correlated, and due to immigration, countries can have positive population growth even as their birth rate is below replacement.

> For Wall Street, I still have the letter back from Fisher Black at Goldman Sachs saying that he saw no opportunities for optimization on Wall Street. I sent lots of resume copies, went on a few interviews, had not yet heard of James Simons, and got nothing.

To conclude from this, despite everything that has happened in the interim, that math is unemployable is an, uhm, mistake. As I recall, President Obama was lamenting the brain drain to Wall Street speaking precisely of the number of math PhDs lured there from more fruitful pursuits. Not to mention, as I recall there is an equation bearing Mr. Black's name, the accurate/efficient solution of which has had some importance in finance.

I basically followed drduh's guide mentioned above. In particular, for the touch feature there is this subsection: https://github.com/drduh/YubiKey-Guide#touch-to-authenticate

See also: https://developers.yubico.com/PGP/Card_edit.html

I don’t do that and it wouldn’t be useful for me personally, but I’m just a single data point.

What's much more important for me is the underlying capabilities -- a key which supports rsa4096 is great, a key which supports curve25519 in some fashion would be incredible.

I also have configured my Yubikey 4 to require a physical touch for every SSH auth attempt even in GPG-for-SSH. The PIN stuff also carries over to my knowledge -- at least, I need to use my user PIN to unlock my SSH key for the first attempt (subsequent ones require a touch). It's possible that the configuration I am using is not well-known, but it appears to match exactly the PIV case you describe. Except perhaps the n=3 is fixed for GPG-for-SSH (not sure about this) and you think n=/=3 is a valuable configuration option?

(not sure about the SSH agent forwarding as I haven't tested that, would be surprised if it worked without a physical touch)

Basically I don't see the differences you describe in day to day usage at all.

For a different approach (this approach is mentioned briefly at the beginning of the post, and dismissed with "I did not like that very much"), see also drduh's Yubikey guide: https://github.com/drduh/YubiKey-Guide#ssh

Note that the PIV approach used in the OP does not support RSA4096, while the OpenPGP approach does (since Yubikeys support RSA4096 in OpenPGP mode but not in PIV mode).

> 1) Don't plan on renting your whole life because inflation will catch up with you.

It seems like in your framework (point (2-3) of the first grouping) this is not true as long as your annual rent is less than 3-4% of required capital for comparable shelter (ignoring implicit leverage in a mortgage). You will do better in the long-run in stocks. Risk-adjusted, well that's another matter.

If you believe that democracy is a good feature of government, then policy outcomes (such as, arguably, the existence of billionaires) which threaten the effectiveness of that agreed-upon-good are failures. This is not saying that that which has democratic support is right/moral, it's about allowing the existence of the institution we nominally support and allow for its uninterfered operation.

If, conversely, you don't believe that democracy is a good feature of government, there are bigger things to discuss than the impact of wealthy individuals on that process.

A lot of these discussions take this framing for granted.

Right, we certainly would never have a global credit crisis, blowup, and ill-justified austerity based on rigorous quantitative financial economics.

On the topic of the article: The desire to focus on questioning whether a framework for economic analysis and planning is achieving outcomes for humans that we want isn't properly and morally substituted by 'rigor' papering over one's policy preferences if those human outcomes are at odds with the human outcomes we want. If that makes less sense than I intended, let me simplify: A key part of the scientific method is examination of whether what you are doing is even working.

This is why pass-tomb was invented.

nb: The algorithms that people use in practice (e.g. in MATLAB) are even more sophisticated and based on ARnoldi iterations, an entirely different set of algorithms, through the ARPACK set of numerical routines.

Not just the author has access; the drafts of the Infamy speech are public: https://www.archives.gov/publications/prologue/2001/winter/c...

You can view the handwritten edits by Roosevelt in the archival drafts.

The following hack makes it even more friendly, removing the annoying sci-hub sidebar so you can view it purely as a PDF.

https://greasyfork.org/en/scripts/28331-remove-annoying-boxe...

Of course "a lot" is the answer. That is precisely my point: for the audience of these slides, speed does matter. :)

Yes but how many of the people who these slides were designed for are people doing cosmos simulations? That's the relevant quantity. It's especially funny because the author's area of research is in cosmos simulations. :-)

This is not a post with CS folks talking about Fortran--that is not TACC's role.

Despite the enormous amount of snark directed Fortran's way, practitioners in HPC still use it, and Python cannot seriously be discussed in the same context.

I run Wireguard on my systems and to my knowledge it does not log anything on my Linux systems (not that I intended specifically to set it up that way, it is just something that I noticed). Can you tell me where I can find these logs which I am seemingly unaware of? I do know that my iOS app logs things but I'm talking about Linux.