4 ms·

> I don't know, is it important to make that distinction? Again, it is if you're interviewing a money manager. And that's basically what you're doing when you

> I don't know, is it important to make that distinction? Again, it is if you're interviewing a money manager. And that's basically what you're doing when you're judging a stock tip, whether from /r/WallStreetBets or anywhere else. That's not to say that professional investors don't post on Reddit. But so do a lot of idiots who talk a good game. My bet is that there's more of the latter than the former. If you wouldn't give equal credence to the software opinions of your two hypothetical examples, then you shouldn't do so with the investing opinions of my two examples. I'd sooner trust the advice of people with more knowledge vs. those with less. I'm not sure why that idea is such a tough sell for you. Obviously, feel free to do what you want with your money. I know which of the two people I'm trusting with mine. The market will tell us who was right in the long run.

maximinus_thrax 4y ago
Not disagreeing with what you're saying. But if interviewing money managers, I care very little about: - how they're calling themselves (investors vs traders vs speculators vs etc..) - how other people are calling them (investors vs traders vs speculators vs etc..) - whether or not some group of people considers them true 'investors'. I'm talking (and have been talking) about the terminology here. > I'd sooner trust the advice of people with more knowledge vs. those with less. Again, please re-read my comments. Your text has nothing to do with what I said. When I said it's not important to make the distinction I was referring solely to the terminology.
- toomanyrichies 4y ago
  > When I said it's not important to make the distinction I was referring solely to the terminology. I mean, it's important in the sense that it's generally useful to be able to differentiate two things that are, in fact, different from each other? When I order orange juice with my brunch, I don't want the waiter to come back with apple juice. When I ask my general practitioner to recommend a good oncologist, I don't want them to refer me to an ophthalmologist. Why would this be any different? Things mean things. To the extent that we blur the lines of our shared vocabulary, we make it harder to communicate with each other. Maybe you've never needed to distinguish between these two very different concepts, but lots of other people have.

maximinus_thrax 4y ago

Not disagreeing with what you're saying. But if interviewing money managers, I care very little about: - how they're calling themselves (investors vs traders vs speculators vs etc..) - how other people are calling them (investors vs traders vs speculators vs etc..) - whether or not some group of people considers them true 'investors'. I'm talking (and have been talking) about the terminology here. > I'd sooner trust the advice of people with more knowledge vs. those with less. Again, please re-read my comments. Your text has nothing to do with what I said. When I said it's not important to make the distinction I was referring solely to the terminology.

toomanyrichies 4y ago
> When I said it's not important to make the distinction I was referring solely to the terminology. I mean, it's important in the sense that it's generally useful to be able to differentiate two things that are, in fact, different from each other? When I order orange juice with my brunch, I don't want the waiter to come back with apple juice. When I ask my general practitioner to recommend a good oncologist, I don't want them to refer me to an ophthalmologist. Why would this be any different? Things mean things. To the extent that we blur the lines of our shared vocabulary, we make it harder to communicate with each other. Maybe you've never needed to distinguish between these two very different concepts, but lots of other people have.