jannotti

I get where you're coming from - this response seemed overly harsh. But I do think there's an important difference - this petition is anonymous and criticizes three people by name. Armstrong's response criticizes nobody by name (he couldn't!)

Really frustrating that three consecutive comments just claim "not as good, "same", "not as good". Would it be so hard to name a particular feature that matters to you when saying Signal is lacking? Otherwise what's the point of your comment?

Grubbhub, Seamless, Eat24, Foodler, DiningIn. They were all around and fairly large by then. But they didn't go big on spending VC money, so over time DoorDash wins. Pretty interesting, however it turns out.

That was AOL / Time Warner, right?

I appreciate your measured response. I certainly had not dug deep into these daily 3X funds, as the daily/drag aspect seemed (seems?) clearly a problem. But, I can't just pretend the 10yr history of UPRO doesn't exist. I'll have to think more about this.

If it were possible (I recognize it isn't, due to margin limits), would it not be better to be 3x leveraged in your margin account, and simply buy the basic S&P and bond products? Wouldn't that avoid the "drag", and you'd end up better off?

Please stay away from leverage equity index funds.

https://capitalallocatorspodcast.com/wp-content/uploads/2017...

Edit: For more clarity - risk parity can make sense, but I don't think you ever need to use leverage on your equities to get risk parity. The fundamental insight of risk parity investing is that at commonly recommended ratios (50/50, 60/40) the risk (variance) from equities totally dominates the risk from bonds. So the risk parity advice is usually something with a much higher bond mix, but the entire portfolio is leveraged. But DO NOT use levered ETFs that recognize, say, 3x the DAILY movement of the S&P to do this. They don't do what you think. Read that link, or compute the following two scenarios:

1) Market goes up 1.1% on odd days, down 1% on even days. That yields about 9% (200 trading days). But a 3x daily etf product would only get you about 22%, not 27%.

2) Market foes up 1% on odd days, down 1.1% on even. That, sadly, means you lose about 11% on the year. If you use a 3x DAILY etf product, you lose around 75%.

All of them. I’d say that’s the biggest problem recoil is addressing.

If food delivery and ride hailing continue to experience inverse demand relationships, there's a pretty big synergy here in being able to keep your drivers (oops, I mean the independent business owners you've contracted with) busy.

I get the feeling, but I rarely think "I'm completely done now, time to comment!" Better to admit that and document a bit earlier than when it's "finished".

"Banning a book" colloquially means that nobody is allowed to read that book, it conjures images of book burnings and the gestapo searching your house for contraband. "Banning" a repo here means, "Github is not offering you free resources to develop your code. Fortunately, you're using a distributed source control management scheme so everyone has a backup. Please take it elsewhere."

Sharepoint has an uncertain future? I had never heard of it a year ago, but as I got to know the "enterprise" space, it seems every large company is heavily invested in it. What might replace the need to share documents across a company in the MS world?

Well, you did say you didn't finish it. So would it surprise you to learn that topic is addressed directly?

Title might be:

Coronavirus Crisis Shows Marijuana Is ‘Essential’ and Pays High Taxes

I think this does a good job of presenting the financial issues properly without too much rhetoric. The most important point was that if these corporations need a bailout to survive, then the stockholders have already lost their money. The bailout preserves the corporation, for the good of the country and/or workers, not to prevent stock holders from seeing losses.

One place where I am in less agreement is when the authors says that the government should be paid back and retain its share of ownership (I think that's what the article implied). The author wants this to be an equity investment. Those are not paid back. Any dividend would be shared in proportion to ownership (previous stockholders may have been quite diluted, of course).

And then my final question is, should the government retain equity indefinitely? Might we imagine paying out shares to citizens?

Then you'd probably still want this switch, but expect to be notified of the block. Then you could move in an orderly fashion.

Viaweb was founded in 1995 and sold in 1998. It WAS part of the first bubble. And no, people were not routinely writing web server based "applications" in 1995. They were, at best, making some early websites. Also nobody was thinking of pages as screens in an app powered by server based software. OpenMarket, I suppose. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Market

But they were only founded in 1994.

They also used to say you needed to do this if you "exclusively" used third party sign on. Now it's if you use third party sign on at all.

That's true, though I often forget it. But surely those cracker-jack security expert HTML writers don't forget! Or use such privacy insensitive tools as the ones you've mentioned.

It's another function though, surely harder to reach for than the normal search. What's the value in bifurcating your searching process? What do you gain?

I mean, he had to learn to read too. If not for that, he'd never have founded viaweb!

True, but not very interesting.

I happen to think both were fairly innovative. Both viaweb and YC were at the forefront of a newish idea that seems pretty obvious in retrospect: Server based applications, and startup incubators. Both existed before to some extent, but pg recognized their value pretty quickly, and did them both well enough to make an impact. (I'd learn toward more credit incubators and less for server-based apps, but whatever.)

Yes, please say more. I've been idly looking that these both from a distance and I would not have expected differences along that dimension. I would expect the expose nearly identical GQL types from the same pg schema.

One difference is that today's page anchors are only put there by the page author, so, since all authors are cracker-jack security experts, they would not have made an anchor available in such a sensitive part of the document, since it opens their readers up to this risk.

As you can tell, I think that the difference is a real, technically true difference, but the implication is a bit dumb, since authors do not have this kind of thing in mind when deciding whether to anchor. You might as well be mad about lazy image loading too. If a browser is smart enough to only load images near an anchor, then this same risk would have been opened up when that was introduced. (The author wrote the anchor before lazy loading, so they correctly perceived no risk, then lazy loading turned it into a risk.)

I thought that was a strange takeaway for the article to take. His analysis was correct. He was undone by a factor he didn't even contemplate. His confidence in his "analysis" was spot on.

There's definitely a lesson here, but I would not call it over-confidence. If the bank had gone under, would that have been called over-confidence on the part of his friend? At some point, every mistake of any kind whatsoever is called "over-confidence".

Searching visually? Yes, 100k would be impossible. But then, even one year's worth would be impossible. So you're surely using your editor's search function, and that's definitely fast enough to not care whether you've got several lifetimes' notes.

A do see a lot of people who are making date stamped files, but I can't understand why. Do you want to switch between using C-s vs dropping to command-line for grep?

Doesn't taking a picture of the whole page at once and then having it read to you after OCR dominate this in every way, from ease of input (from the page) to flexibility of output (to the human)?

Yeah, it's weird that I find code formatted by black much less aesthetically pleasing than js code from prettier. But we're still using it.

There is no way mass-market phones are giving up on the camera that allows for video conferencing / FaceTime. Don't trivialize the utility by calling it the "selfie" camera. And don't claim you've confirmed it's useless by checking your camera roll.

You say "next to no one" but I certainly feel the same way, and his comment was the highest voted. So...

I wonder how many of them are independent founders being facetious. They might be, literally, a software enegineer who is "at" wework.

Could you say more about each, with a couple examples? I find myself building little CLIs all the time, yet haven't developed any real intuition about what makes a good one.