I could not disagree more. If you say "Ben told Mary that he would work with Scott on Jeff's house on Tuesday, but that Amy preferred Wednesday", that sentence carries a lot of meaning for the speaker and listener because those "names" have meaning to both parties. Nobody would tolerate the descriptive alternative: "General Contracting Company Owner told General Contracting Company Secretary that he would work with General Contracting Company Hired Hand #4 on Customer #22's house on Tuesday but Customer #22 Spouse preferred Wednesday".
Once has to deal with a couple dozen data imports that would run regularly.
I advocated for just having a script for each, even if they were 80% alike to handle the variations... Another developer created a massive set of database tables and coded abstractions for flexible configuration driven imports.
My solution was done in a couple days... The other dev spent months in their solution that didn't work for half the imports and nobody could follow their solution. When they left the company the next year, the imports that were under the complex solution were switched to scripts and the beast was abandoned entirely.
I get excited by new model releases, try it, switch it to default if I feel it's better, and then I move on. I don't understand why any professional SWE should engage in weird cultish behavior about these models, it's a better mousetrap as far as I'm concerned
its just the old pc vs mac cultism. nobody who actually has work to do cares. much like authors obsessed with typewriters, transport companies with auto brands, etc
I resent the conflation of child abuse and child labor. There's actually a healthy dose of labor for kids that we've all but disallowed from polite conversation
Labor in the sense that it's abuse is exploitative. It's extractive. Child labor seeks to use the children for the profit of the adults running the operation. There's certainly _work_ that children can grow from doing. There's certainly work that looks like labor that children grow from doing. They just actually have to grow from doing it, and that must be the motivation. If you start making money off of children, then your care for the limits of the "healthy dose" starts diminishing real fast.
Yep this, children are the most vulnerable class. If the capitalist system had the power it had in the past, we'd just throw them into factories at age 6 or 7 again and damn them to the terrible life of a factory worker with no rights so some adult can have slightly more.
I wasn't attempting to create that conflation in my post, if you read that, I wasn't clear enough.
I personally think it's fine for children to work on their family's business as long as it doesn't impact their schooling or normal childhood activities. It is a fine line to walk, I don't believe I missed out on anything like after school activities, but that was largely because there aren't too many of those opportunities deep in the mountains in Kentucky. I say it's a fine line, because it's easy to see a scenario where children are put to work in, say a family restaurant, and prevented from doing after school activities like sports or clubs, and miss out on part of the well rounding of an education.
I certainly don't support children working for third parties that then profit off of their labor. In those cases, there is no way to align the incentives to protect the child.
I've been watching my investment accounts, particularly the TSLA fraction, and see-sawing between "This has got to collapse soon, I should..." and "You cannot time the market, idiot".
I'm dissatisfied with the inaction, but I can't come up with a coherent theory about how I should act... Bleah.
Recognize that holding is an action and a choice, too.
If you don’t have a coherent theory to {act}ively hold an asset, you probably shouldn’t be acting to hold it, and be acting to sell it.
This is equally true for TSLA and NVDA as it is for VOO and BRK.
Why? Because when prices are too low you need to be able to hold (and ideally buy) with conviction and when prices are too high you need to be able to sell with conviction, although the latter is less important if you have steady income.
If you don’t have a theory of value, you’ll be able to do neither effectively, and risk loss of principal and opportunity in a downturn.
I understand your point; but against it I lay the truism that every time a retail investor trades, value is destroyed. ;)
My own personal financial history has been more damaged by actions taken, than by forbearance and waiting. "Time in the market beats timing the market", style. So I wait for the moment when I've got Something Better To Do with the money, and then I act. And try not to second-guess later.
One possible solution to my framework is (1) to only buy things for which you have a coherent theory (2) that coherent theory holds water over the duration of your investing life.
It's possible that you had a coherent theory for purchasing TSLA at a certain price. If that price has out-run your theory, there is no contradiction in selling that TSLA and parking it in some place you have a coherent theory for, like VOO. This is maturity and humility, not hubris.
If I were in your position, I'd try to ask myself: does this decision to rollover TSLA into something I better-understand (e.g. VOO) fall inside or outside the pattern of "my own personal financial history has been more damaged by actions taken".
FWIW, "Time in beats timing" is a truism that applies to market-spanning indices, not a choice between individual securities. It would be a mistake to apply that logic to individual positions, unless you've given yourself the arbitrary restriction of only buying or selling TSLA and nothing else!
Yep, I’m sitting on the same fence. We can all see the circular deals in the high tech sector which has been the recent engine of the stock market. It’s all uncertainty, everywhere you look.
Hurry, then, while your money is still worth something and there's farms to be had. I did and never looked back, no mortgage, no loans, no nothing. Use your money to become less dependent on future money. In the end it is independence which gives you security, not money in the market or on the bank.
I support this view, though in my own deep thinking about it all, I've come to see that all things are leased. Life itself is leased. We are all on borrowed time with borrowed resources and social contracts.
This affects me because the urgency toward ownership and being less dependent on future money is prudent in some ways, but also naive in others?
When I think about owning property and being free of monthly rent, there's a truth to that. And it feels nice to say we've achieved generational wealth. But maintaining the property costs money and property taxes are recurring, forever. So I've relaxed on this idea that it'll be markedly different from rent.
Maintaining property takes time and costs some money, true. Farm property is (meant to be) productive though so if done right its maintenance has a negative cost, i.e. it makes you money. This goes for the traditional products you might think of - for us, silage from the fields, timber and firewood from the forest - as well as more recent things like electricity from solar panels - we've had negative electricity bills since I installed panels on the barn I built some 5 years ago. We're close to energy independent, once I've arranged some storage solution we will be independent. We have our own water, our own waste disposal facilities, a forest full of deer and elk and swine and the rest for when we might feel the need to tap that resource, enough land to feed the family and the means to store and prepare it without the need for external power - I've been cooking on a wood-fired stove for the last 21 years and prefer it over the alternatives we also have at hand (resistive electric and induction electric hobs). I've baked my own bread for much longer than that so I gradually moved into this 'lifestyle' - and that is what it comes down to, living the way we do is a conscious choice. Sometimes it is a lot of work, sometimes a storm brings down a hectare of forest, other times the water facilities freeze solid, sometimes a moose or deer pulls down the fencing in the middle of the night, sometimes there's weird critters trying to make a home under our roof, etc. All in all it is more than worth it for me.
Owning and living on a farm is not for everyone as it does tie you down more than a random apartment somewhere. If you're the type who wants to fly off to some trendy destination on a whim a farm might not be for you.
You need to hit that thumbs down with the explanation so the model is trained with the penalty applied. Otherwise your explanations are not in the training corpus
reply