matt4077

18 ms·

121.
by matt4077 7y ago
No. The money would come from the federal deposit insurance program, which is funded by the banks, not the government. The money would also be recovered over time, when the bank’s loans become due and other assets are liquidated.
122.
by matt4077 7y ago
Animals are more or less “things” as far as the law is concerned. A dangerous dog will be put down irregardless of intent, just like a dangerous boulder above a house will be removed or secured. Blame, guilt, or morality don’t come into pla
123.
The Man Who Built the Bauhaus(newyorker.com)
2 points by matt4077 7y ago|0 comments
124.
by matt4077 7y ago
I wouldn’t actually make much sense to earn even, say, 10x as much as normal for 12h, if by doing so you lower your chance of even marginal (but lasting) improvements in working conditions. It would also show how selfishness hurts you in th
125.
by matt4077 7y ago
That’s a common “fun fact” but it’s been so overdone people are probably now erring more to the other side. Here’s a graph: http://www.roperld.com/science/graphics/LifeExpectancyForDif... As an example, in the 20t
126.
by matt4077 7y ago
This doesn’t make much sense because life expectancy cohorts are grouped by the year they are born, not the year they died. The concept of a “strong” vs “weak” immune system also doesn’t correspond to reality: for the flu, it’s hypothesized
127.
by matt4077 7y ago
Fun fact: this is bullshit. Large companies, especially public ones and those doing business with the government, follow different sets of rules specifying retention times. For anything that has an impact on accounting, the minimum is usual
128.
by matt4077 7y ago
If only there was a way to find out how much profit a public company makes, instead of going three-deep in a threat with “would be my guess” numbers... FWIW, FB quarterly profits Q1, Q2, and Q3 2018 were 5.1, 5.1, and 6.9 billion, respectiv
129.
by matt4077 7y ago
Those insiders may just be lowering expectations, preparing their audience to consider rather bad news as a “massive win”. After all, the insiders most familiar with the matter are those deciding how much to set aside for its eventual resol
130.
Jeopardy's James Holzhauer Explains His Strategy(theatlantic.com)
2 points by matt4077 7y ago|0 comments
131.
by matt4077 7y ago
The linked source seems to be down. And, judging by this and its URL, it would seem to be a rather sketchy outfit, anyway. Bloomberg on this: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-04-23/softbank-... No
132.
by matt4077 7y ago
That’s not a moral hazard. The word doesn’t even appear in the paper. It’s just an example of somewhat efficiently choosing a different point on the risk/reward continuum when the payoffs change. A moral hazard is choosing a selfish co
133.
by matt4077 7y ago
Name one outright falsehood in the NYT that isn’t old enough to have graduated high school. You also failed to elaborate how any system of trust would work in the absence of the reputational system that is mediated by such branding as those
134.
by matt4077 7y ago
It seems plausible that many people do derive value from journalism without paying for it. Among those are, for example, people profiting from others making more informed choices at the ballot box, or being freed from corrupt politicians un
135.
by matt4077 7y ago
“we will have open access to data/information and a reputation system that rewards objective, consistent analysis.” I have no idea what this means, nor do I know why newspapers apparently need to die to make it possible? In any case, e
136.
by matt4077 7y ago
It’s a somewhat stupid example, because nobody endangers their own life just because they have health insurance. Smoking instead of reckless driving may make it (slightly) more understandable.
137.
by matt4077 7y ago
There’s an aspect of compensation to it, which is obviously lower than a billion. Then, there’s “punitive” damages, I. e. The wish to hurt the company in excess of individual damages to discourage future behavior. Obviously, actual damages
138.
by matt4077 7y ago
„Apart from a clean history...“ is a pretty strong caveat. Our times are seeing a breakdown of trust. News media, companies, and politicians are considered corrupt by default. Yet trust is the single most important ingredient to organize a
139.
by matt4077 7y ago
Thinking is fine, speaking can be problematic. And if you believe speech can do no harm, it can not possibly do good, either. Or we could just randomly generate text and improve the world.
140.
by matt4077 7y ago
Intuitively (I did some research in bioinformatics, including the brain, but mostly its genetics) I would think ADHD could quite possible respond to something like this, while for autism chances are lower. Reasoning being that rhythms are q
141.
by matt4077 7y ago
The US car industry is advocating pretty vehemently against tariffs right now. But besides, you’re not even mentioning the customers, who always loose out because their natural choice of product is artificially influenced.
142.
by matt4077 7y ago
Forward, where the wing is higher off the ground. The rest is like a skateboard suddenly accelerating, which will tend to pitch you nose up (and on the ground).
143.
by matt4077 7y ago
I remember several US households with plastic cover over their couches. They didn’t even remove them for special occasions. It always struck me as extremely strange to effectively ruin a product only to be able to throw it away in somewhat
144.
by matt4077 7y ago
Fun to see “Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold; Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world” is ranked above “Robert Scobel is an ass”. The algorithm seems to know about tech c-list celebs AND able to recognize great literature.
145.
by matt4077 7y ago
“150m user scale” is an expression speaking to Facebook’s gain , not to any users’ loss. What’s needed is serious privacy legislation, not creative reinterpretation.
146.
by matt4077 7y ago
Is this question rhetorical? Your online banking is known to be verified, therefore another company can piggyback on that verification.
147.
by matt4077 7y ago
I thought of this as well. One difference, at least subjectively, is that Google seems to make far fewer of such mistakes. Just as with people, it’s sometimes difficult to judge them for a single act. Only by aggregating behavior over time
148.
by matt4077 7y ago
They did have the upload-your-address-book functionality before they instituted this check. I’m very much hoping to see Facebook suffer for this, but I could conceivably see a scenario where they reused code that did more than they wanted.
149.
by matt4077 7y ago
Not a lawyer, but at least in my jurisdiction, fraud requires a monetary loss by the victim. Generally, civil law is better suited for this sort of thing, no matter how good a pitchfork feels in your hand. As but one of the reasons, the req
150.
by matt4077 7y ago
They are not “collecting” emotional reactions. Reading comprehension: they used a training set to predict emotions, and sell ads based solely on content.

More ›