marvin

56 ms·

601.
by marvin 6y ago
That's fair enough. Prefacing it, as "even if you're right, the market can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent" gets that point across better; that there's a dual risk in betting on the downside sce
602.
by marvin 6y ago
I don't like this saying. People also say this about things they end up being wrong about, such as Tesla in 2013. Hell, given that economists predict 15 out of the last 3 recessions, people who say this are probably flat-out wrong more
603.
by marvin 6y ago
This is already the status quo, and has been for many years now. There are only rare examples today where companies that have a plausible prospect of growing >100X, go public before this growth happens. I'm inclined to agree with yo
604.
by marvin 6y ago
Shorting a company that’s «looking pretty suspect» right before it appreciates by 2200% is pertty much the definition of being very, very wrong. Burry probably didn’t do that badly, but any successful Tesla short in the last 2 years has hap
605.
by marvin 6y ago
I disagree almost 100% with this. The most novel scientific ideas are so wild they're almost in crackpot territory. Novel ideas in general are ideas no one has ever explored before. And while most science is incremental, most science
606.
by marvin 6y ago
Bitcoin has pioneered a new asset class that can be transferred over the Internet and is not dependent on a central authority. I don't own any cryptocurrency and can't put a dollar valuation on such an achievement, but it's c
607.
by marvin 6y ago
Agreed. Try to make an argument up here that our tax burden is debilitating, and all you get in return is «our taxes are the same as every other country, 30% on average». Can be refuted in a debate, but of course the dishonest rhetoric refl
608.
by marvin 6y ago
Does the US have significant employer tax? A data point from Norway: Employer tax of 14% of pre-tax salary is paid by employer. Employer also has to pay 2-13% (dependent on individual negotiation) of pre-tax salary for retirement savings. T
609.
by marvin 6y ago
My guess at this point would be that he gets convicted for having violated firearms laws, but not for murder. It's an interesting case, but the political climate surrounding it spans much more than just the shooting, and is (seen with
610.
by marvin 6y ago
The question in the Rittenhouse case isn’t what sentence people get for murder. It’s whether he committed murder at all, or killed in self-defense after having the horrible (and probably ethically unsound) judgement to travel armed to an ob
611.
by marvin 6y ago
My Norwegian company calls it IT, with developers, devops, UX and the whole shebang. Generally the best-paid department of the whole company, which is in finance. IT support isn’t even employed here, it’s contracted out.
612.
by marvin 6y ago
The orthogonality thesis says that advanced artificial intelligence (yet to be built) can be both vastly powerful and have arbitrary goals -- in particular, goals that are catastrophic for humanity. (More specifically: capability and morali
613.
by marvin 6y ago
Good points. It's obvious that the potential for ethical problems in such a situation is huge. I've thought for similar questions that a required baseline would be to at least have a society that provides a viable minimum social s
614.
by marvin 6y ago
Would it be immoral if they were offered a million dollars?Honest question, because it feels like the philosophy might not match up with common experience. It feels like an interesting question. People voluntarily risk worse for less pay in
615.
by marvin 6y ago
Is there a way to plausibly and without corruption just tax these externalities at least more than the cost of repairing the damage - and spend the tax money actually doing that?
616.
by marvin 6y ago
Most people you'd disagree with generally have a point , if you get past the quick-release talking points. If one tries to have a genuine conversation, it might be surprising to many how much common ground can be found.
617.
by marvin 6y ago
> Nothing is tied to any kind of fundamentals. It's all about "we like the stock". Now, if many peiple start believing that, it will cause an actual bubble. When interest rates are taken into consideration, the global st
618.
by marvin 6y ago
The real problem is that the stock market has historically delivered 7-9% on average, and consensus is it will likely be considerably lower in the future. Making significant money from an ownership share like that takes decades of disciplin
619.
by marvin 6y ago
Not a chance. The human mind generally isn't built to correctly assess the impact of unlikely, catastrophic events. Maybe they'll steer clear of excessive short selling for a while, but you can be sure they'll forget it event
620.
by marvin 6y ago
Regardless, it should definitely be worth more than the $8 per share that it was in 2013, or the $45 per share that it was in 2014. Short sellers were clamoring very loudly then too. Lots of people preached "the market can stay irratio
621.
by marvin 6y ago
Failure to deliver on borrowed/shorted stocks would be a conpletely plausible scenario during a short squeeze.
622.
by marvin 6y ago
Toyota didn't talk about anything else. Their strategy was loudly 100% hydrogen and no batteries. Probably from 2014-2019, while Tesla built their global charging infrastructure and manufacturing capacity.
623.
by marvin 6y ago
Well, the ID.3 doesn't always stop when you push the brake pedal. Were multiple accounts of that in the last few weeks. I suppose they'll sort it out eventually.
624.
by marvin 6y ago
Maybe I was imprecise to use the term legal . By definition, WSB is controversial because a lot of powerful people criticise them and would prefer them not to exist. Legally, I can see that they're moving in an uncharted gray area tha
625.
by marvin 6y ago
I agree with you. But there's definitely a controversy here, in the sense that two large groups have strongly differing opinions. To my eyes, that controversy is part of a very public power struggle. I firmly believe that the WSB com
626.
by marvin 6y ago
That's a decent workaround if you're technical and stubborn, but there needs to be a solution for this that's available for everyone with just a few clicks.
627.
by marvin 6y ago
The Discord ban was clearly because the community itself is controversial from a legal point of view. That's why the ban happened today. But I think this is an unwise move. Each community that is censored over something legal but con
628.
by marvin 6y ago
That's obviously incorrect. When someone on wallstreetbets says "What's up retards", they are obviously not intending to insult everyone reading it. Context matters. It's a very convenient excuse for banning a contr
629.
by marvin 6y ago
Immediately decoupled from dividends or traditional metrics like P/E doesn't mean decoupled from the likelihood to achieve good performance on such metrics in the future. Consider e.g. Tesla in 2013. It had a market cap (directly
630.
by marvin 6y ago
When you own shares, you own a fraction of the company. The assets of the company partly belong to you, and if you have the voting power, you can decide to pay out some of it. Of course, there's a philosophical argument to be made if t

More ›