prev <-> next
[2017-05-01 14:45:06] - a: Boom! It's settled. Passive investing is for suckers. -Paul
[2017-05-01 14:06:49] - wow, daniel is the definite loser so far today. market up 0.4%, but we're all doing much closer to 2% ~a
[2017-05-01 10:59:39] - Daniel: Failing, low-energy index funds can't compete with real stocks without cheating. SAD! -Paul
[2017-05-01 10:58:20] - Thats is how you argue and win things in today's world yes? -Daniel
[2017-05-01 10:58:00] - Paul: Stop trying to make index funds look bad! Clearly you are a giant cheater and I already protest the results of this challenge (unless I win). FAKE RESULTS! -Daniel
[2017-05-01 10:54:46] - -Paul
[2017-05-01 10:54:43] - a: Sorry, I'll fix it
[2017-05-01 10:51:41] - paul: *mutual* funds update every day, yes. but it's at the end of the day. you should not have added the difference. ~a
[2017-05-01 10:50:04] - a: Do index funds not update every day? Should I not have added the difference? -Paul
[2017-05-01 10:49:33] - Daniel: Yeah, both series should be interesting. I picked both the Wizards and Rockets to win in a bracket I do, but I also thought both were bold upset picks. Would've been nice if the Wizards had held their lead in game 1. -Paul
[2017-05-01 10:25:03] - paul: yeah i think you fucked up daniel. you added his previous change to his previous price. which sets him back to april 27th. ~a
[2017-05-01 10:21:51] - Paul: I think we will find out soon about our question of who gets further in the playoffs, Rockets or Wizards. I think Wizards can beat the Celtics but not a push over. Rockets and Spurs I'm still not totally sure what to expect. -Daniel
[2017-05-01 10:14:52] - a: Does that not work? -Paul
[2017-05-01 10:14:48] - a: Oh, I took the numbers just now and added the change for today. -Paul
[2017-05-01 09:54:31] - paul: i guess for daniel we have to use previous close? what should we do? ~a
[2017-04-28 10:38:33] - a: I meant with your attempt to mimic an index fund with big blue chips. -Paul
[2017-04-28 10:30:28] - me?! she doesn't have gbtc. i could easily see that dropping half of it's value in the next year. ~a
[2017-04-28 10:15:09] - a: Disney was on my short list of contenders. Could easily see Chipotle and Alphabet beating the market. Not so sure about snap... -Paul
[2017-04-28 10:14:04] - a: She did a better job of what you were trying to do.
-Paul[2017-04-28 10:10:38] - she's going to win. ~a
[2017-04-28 10:10:19] - paul: i like her picks. ~a
[2017-04-28 10:09:31] - i mean, either one really, but we should decide now. ~a
[2017-04-28 10:09:08] - open on monday. ~a
[2017-04-28 10:04:38] - Did we ever decide if we're using the price at close today or price at open on Monday? -Paul
[2017-04-28 10:04:18] - I added Gurkie to our challenge. She picked her 5 stocks independent of seeing ours. I do not believe she wants in on the bitcoin bet. -Paul
[2017-04-27 10:21:49] - paul: i have the opposite situation as you: gbtc has gone up 7% in the last two days. good for my portfolio but bad for my bet.
luckily my portfolio is bigger than my bet. ~a[2017-04-26 12:26:21] - woo! ~a
[2017-04-26 11:10:11] - a: Let's do 0.02 btc then. I like to live life on the edge. -Paul
[2017-04-26 11:09:45] - Haha, BOFI and SHOP are both down big today. Yay lower cost basis! -Paul
[2017-04-26 00:26:41] - paul: which is why our other outstanding (2025) bet is denominated in usd
~a[2017-04-26 00:25:58] - aaron: yeah, poe's law. have you seen all of the cards-against-humanity clones that have come out the last few years? bleh. ~a
[2017-04-26 00:12:06] - http://thetrashcan.co/edgy-new-board-game-just-some-cards-with-bad-words-on-them/ aww "fuck shit holocaust" is a pack of cards with swear words, slurs and sensitive topics printed on them, and no further instructions - aaron
[2017-04-25 23:23:52] - a: Just realized that could be a double whammy. Bitcoin goes up big vs USD, causing your gbtc to go up big, which means you win AND I owe you more. -Paul
[2017-04-25 22:12:17] - sure. ~a
[2017-04-25 20:49:25] - a: We putting any money on our competition? 0,.01 btc? 0.02? -Paul
[2017-04-25 16:19:16] - a: Also a car company.
-Paul[2017-04-25 16:16:00] - i assume you know i also own shares in tsla. ~a
[2017-04-25 16:13:02] - i'm a conundrum. ~a
[2017-04-25 15:57:43] - a: Heh, for such an ardent cyclist and hater of cars, you sure do like automotive companies that run into trouble with governments.
-Paul[2017-04-25 15:31:35] - well maybe you'll get a huge drop right before may 1st. that could be good too. i bought vlkay after they announced their stupid shit in 2015. also bought tm after their stupid accelerator shit in 2011. also bought a bunch of vtsax a day after brexit was announced. ~a
[2017-04-25 15:12:59] - that they are under government investigation or something.
-Paul[2017-04-25 15:12:49] - a: Nah, I wouldn't even know how I would game them. I thought it would be boring to have two of the same picks, which is why I mentioned maybe not doing Amazon, but I'm pretty sure the picks I have now are the ones I would have regardless of what yours were. Also, I don't expect to change any, but it would be nice if BOFI announces... -Paul
[2017-04-25 15:01:25] - paul: you're locked in at 9:29am on monday really. . . . you've seen my picks, so hopefully you aren't changing to game my picks. ~a
[2017-04-25 14:28:22] - Actually, I just checked and Bank of Internet and Illumina (40% of my picks) report earnings today.
-Paul[2017-04-25 14:24:42] - a: Random question, but are we locked into out picks now? It's earnings season, and I don't know when my picks report, but there is a possibility of big news coming out in the next week. -Paul
[2017-04-25 14:05:11] - a: That's the hope. Little need to visit brick-and-mortar locations anymore. Online only bank has reduced overhead and can offer more competitive rates and whatnot. It's the second biggest gainer of my real life portfolio right now. -Paul
[2017-04-25 14:03:12] - yeah, i googled it. honestly i like the idea. i hardly use my bank's ATMs now that i can deposit checks from my phone. and now that cash has mostly disappeared from our society. ~a
[2017-04-25 13:58:35] - a: a: https://www.bankofinternet.com/ Online only bank. -Paul
[2017-04-25 13:57:38] - a: Considering the one year time frame, I probably should've gone with safer, larger cap picks. I could see one of mine tanking and bringing down my portfolio with it (like gbtc with you). -Paul
[2017-04-25 13:57:35] - BoI . . . never heard of them. ~a
[2017-04-25 13:53:26] - If I was matching my largest individual holdings (excluding index funds, obviously), it would be (in order) Amazon, Disney, Netflix, Tesla, Bank of Internet. 4 of those are also my biggest gainers, though, so being my top holdings isn't necessarily because I believe in them the most.
-Paul[2017-04-25 13:51:11] - a: I was going to say, with Berkshire and Amazon, it looks like you are aiming for a diversified almost index fund type of portfolio. I decided to go a little riskier with mine, with a bunch of smaller cap stocks that I think could have big upside. -Paul
[2017-04-25 13:37:56] - if it matters, i don't own much gbtc IRL, but i have a large percent of btc (the currency), so my real-world portfolio will also follow. up or down. ~a
[2017-04-25 13:35:56] - yeah, i'm mostly trying to have a well rounded (vtsax-ish) portfolio. i predict gbtc will either make or destroy my portfolio. ~a
[2017-04-25 13:23:09] - a: Heh, so if we exclude Amazon and GBTC, every one of your picks has a larger market cap than mine. -Paul
[2017-04-25 13:13:30] - a: Although now I am overweight ecommerce and I hope I don't regret leaving off Disney.
-Paul[2017-04-25 13:12:55] - a: Sorry, my bad. I went to go back to add my next picks and couldn't help but notice yours. I think I probably would've gone with Amazon as my last pick, so I guess I will. -Paul
[2017-04-25 13:10:56] - paul: well we really shouldn't have displayed our picks before the other person had decided on their funds. iow, if you were going to use amzn and nflx, you really should. ~a
[2017-04-25 12:18:00] - a: I'm so torn on my last two picks. I was considering AMZN and NFLX, but now that I see that you have them, I'm thinking I should go with something else. UA to rebound? DIS despite coming off an incredible run of movies? I have a few health care type stocks but can't settle on one of those either. -Paul
[2017-04-25 11:58:30] - Daniel: Oh, well, I also compare to my Vanguard account (which is all in Vanguard funds). Same deal, though, I just use whatever current portfolio value that Vanguard provides. I assume they take out their fees behind the scenes somewhere. -Paul
[2017-04-25 11:54:31] - Yeah I guess I was thinking the expense ratio's of funds. But for stock picks thats moot so never mind. I would be the only one with expenses (ongoing annual ones). -Daniel
[2017-04-25 11:33:02] - Daniel: For when I have been measuring my returns versus the S&P for the past year? It should. My portfolio is in a Roth IRA, so taxes shouldn't be an issue, and the commissions for trades come out of my Scottrade account (I use my total account value to measure my portfolio's worth). Am I missing any expenses? -Paul
[2017-04-25 11:31:35] - Daniel: It's hard to keep track of, but I try to keep my international exposure around 30-50% in terms of Vanguard international funds. I like to think I am more risk tolerant than most and I'm hoping international markets will rebound some after lagging the US for awhile. -Paul
[2017-04-25 11:23:00] - Paul: I think the answer to this is yes but your return numbers when you look at them later do they already take expenses into account? Just curious. -Daniel
[2017-04-25 11:22:22] - Paul: I thought about it
I think 40% international is probably heavier than most people and heavier than I would advise most people so I'll go the other way to be a bit more conservative. -Daniel[2017-04-25 11:20:32] - Daniel: Come on, be aggressive and go 60/40.
-Paul[2017-04-25 11:20:10] - a: Made a spreadsheet and shared it with you and Daniel. Went ahead and put in Daniel's picks. I'll put mine in shortly. For the start, are we taking prices at market open on Monday or market close the Friday before? -Paul
[2017-04-25 11:16:47] - a: I said 70/30 but I'm find abiding by the rules to go with 80/20. -Daniel
[2017-04-25 11:16:20] - a: Yeah,I'm lazy.
I'll make a spreadsheet to share. -Paul[2017-04-25 11:02:29] - aw man, it hasn't even scrolled off the top page
"vtsax = 80%, vtiax = 20%?" ~a[2017-04-25 11:00:59] - a: Sounds good. I just worry about not being able to find it here a few months after the start. I've already forgotten Daniel's "picks". 80% Total Market and 20% some sort of international exposure? -Paul
[2017-04-25 11:00:01] - paul: either one works for me. it'll eventually make its way to google docs i think, but we might as well post something here too. ~a
[2017-04-25 10:39:59] - a: I'm honestly not even sure where to begin dissecting that article. I feel like Apu refusing to come to a Civil War reenactment. -- Xpovos
[2017-04-25 10:30:50] - a: Where are we going to list our picks? Shared google doc? Message board? -Paul
[2017-04-25 10:29:27] - a: I just have a hard time following the article with all the new terms thrown at me, from "stealthing" to "gender-based violence" and whatnot. This does somewhat go towards my point from awhile ago about the possibly expanding definition of rape.
-Paul[2017-04-25 10:08:24] - paul: yep. ~a
[2017-04-25 10:08:12] - you guys are going to *love* this article because it has wording like "gender-based violence" and "ideology of male supremacy". otoh, i think they'd have an easier time if they just called it "sexual assault". ~a
[2017-04-25 09:45:09] - a: One year time frame is good. We start counting May 1st? 5 stocks? -Paul
[2017-04-25 08:18:12] - mig: I think Nancy's just playing the same politics. She knows enough of her (and Democrats in general) voters are pro life and the importance of lip service. As a nominal Catholic that's a dance she's intimately familiar with. -- Xpovos
[2017-04-24 15:31:59] - xpovos: maybe there was a purge earlier, but the issue appear to be brewing up again, with DNC and Nancy Pelosi at odds with each other over who gets to be considered a proper Democrat. - mig
[2017-04-24 15:03:35] - i concede. the phrasing could be made differently and therefore more correctly. i also agree she is either making a blunder or being intentionally misleading. i don't agree with the premise of "Why does she feel the need to state that she's in favor of protecting life at all levels except that she just explicitly said otherwise" though. ~a
[2017-04-24 14:03:49] - I don't know that "life at all levels" is a commonly used enough phrase that it has a well defined definition but I would read that as including first trimester which seems to contradict her point about being pro women's reproductive rights which is I think Xpovos' point. -Daniel
[2017-04-24 14:02:02] - Think I'm with with Xpovos on this one. Seems like a odd at best ambiguous statement that needs clarification. Stating you are pro woman's reproductive rights generally wouldn't be followed by her phrase of protecting life at all levels. Maybe she is internally defining things weird but that would need explanation. -Daniel
[2017-04-24 13:52:53] - Kleeb's first statement is pro-abortion. Got it. That's a position she as a Democrat wants, or is forced to take. Her second point is either anti-abortion; or completely unrelated and essentially nonsensical. Why does she feel the need to state that she's in favor of protecting life at all levels except that she just explicitly said otherwise. -- Xpovos
[2017-04-24 13:50:52] - You wouldn't then follow that up immediately with "but I also support the second amendment for all, including babies." (I'm making up something nonsensical here to eliminate bias, I hope, forgive the absurdity) because there's no reason for you to say such a thing. Prenatal care has NOTHING to do with the second point. -- Xpovos
[2017-04-24 13:49:38] - a: I expect that you do because you've not said that you don't. Kleeb has, and therefore needs to walk her statement back. Hence the artful turn of phrase. If you were just a politician talking about those other issues. You'd say: "I favor government support of prenatal healthcare, the March of Dimes, etc." That is inarguably a single position. ... -- Xpovos
[2017-04-24 12:43:08] - xpovos: i'm not sure the phrase is unnecessary. if i specifically have defined life as strictly post-birth (or post third-trimester if you'd prefer), then how do i say i care about like normal life? like prenatal care, and infant mortality, and . . . infant care in general? adoptees? orphans? foster children? and domestic abuse victims? you know . . . life? ~a
[2017-04-24 12:26:09] - No, shit. Donnelly is. He's a Senator now. Dammit Indiana, make sense. -- Xpovos
[2017-04-24 12:25:27] - a: If it's not talking out of both sides of her mouth, then the inclusion of the phrase is completely unnecessary. The fact that she said it indicates that it's an attempt to appease voters who take the issue seriously while still being staunchly pro-abortion in all cases. -- Xpovos
[2017-04-24 12:24:15] - Oh, wait, no he's no longer in office. Nevermind. -- Xpovos
[2017-04-24 12:23:18] - mig: They largely purged us years ago. Even the most pro-life of the old Democrats is toeing the line now. I guess the only counter example is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Donnelly -- Xpovos
[2017-04-24 10:59:04] - xpovos: I'm less interested in that element but moreso with this apparent brewing debate amongst democrats on whether the pro-lifers in their midst should be "purged". - mig
[2017-04-24 10:58:48] - depending on your definition of life, i think that's not talking out of both sides of ones mouth
~a[2017-04-24 10:53:16] - mig: I expect politicians to continue to talk out of both sides of their mouth. "Kleeb said by email. "As Chair of the Democratic Party [of Nebraska], I stand with Democrats who continue to ensure women’s reproductive rights are never restricted, and that life at all levels ... is protected."" -- Xpovos
[2017-04-24 10:41:03] - http://www.politico.com/story/2017/04/20/dnc-unity-rally-heath-mello-anti-abortion-237403 should your position on abortion be a litmus test for being a democrat? - mig
[2017-04-24 09:56:18] - one year time-frame? ~a
[2017-04-23 21:58:55] - a: Sure, I'm fine with $200m. I just need to find my own small cap winner.
-Paul[2017-04-22 09:31:53] - market cap is fine. just use 200m instead? or don't. i'm sure i can come up with 5 stocks that aren't gbtc. ~a
[2017-04-21 14:57:49] - a: What restrictions on tickers? You didn't like my market cap idea. Only stocks on the NYSE or NASDAQ? -Paul
[2017-04-21 13:59:26] - a: I guess that should cover most instances. Let's just hope for no splits or acquisitions.
-Paul[2017-04-21 13:57:05] - or, assuming there are no splits, you could just use (newPrice + dividends)/oldPrice. ~a
[2017-04-21 13:56:08] - it should be pretty easy, right? if you have an "adjusted close price", it's pretty easy: newAdjustedPrice/oldAdjustedPrice. (adjusted prices include splits and dividends). ~a
[2017-04-21 13:51:44] - agreed. ~a
[2017-04-21 13:41:38] - a: I kind of like the idea of picking 5 (or some number around there, could be 3-10) equally weighted stocks so there are a couple ways to measure "success". Maybe you win in over portfolio gain because one stock doubled, but all four of your others lost money. Maybe I lost but all my stocks beat the market at least. -Paul
[2017-04-21 12:46:32] - a: Oh, I wouldn't at all be surprised if he did. Wouldn't the smart money be on him winning?
What is the simplest way for us to calculate our gains (both for index funds and individual stocks)? -Paul[2017-04-21 12:40:34] - denial. wow. totally freudian. ~a
[2017-04-21 12:40:03] - ah ok. i thought the weighting was to make the math easier. denial could seriously win this thing. don't discount him yet!
~a[2017-04-21 12:38:56] - I'm fine waiving whatever "weighting" rules we might have for Daniel's index funds.
-Paul[2017-04-21 12:38:23] - daniel: ok so to meet the 1/5th rule: vtsax = 80%, vtiax = 20%? ~a
[2017-04-21 12:30:50] - a: I'd do a basket of index funds. Like total market at like 70% and total international at like 30%. Thats probably the simple basket I'd put out there. Maybe you could add some variety or change weights but I'd be fine with that. -Daniel
[2017-04-21 11:57:02] - a: Sure. That gives us time to settle on the rules. I was going to see how we performed vs the S&P anyway, but I guess total market is even better. -Paul
[2017-04-21 11:45:43] - paul: wanna start on may 1st? ~a
[2017-04-21 11:45:01] - we should put daniel in, with 100% portfolio of vtsax
~a[2017-04-21 11:44:41] - i understand if you want to avoid gbtc. except gbtc isn't a penny stock. i understand why you'd want to leave it out, but think of it this way: i'll only put it in once so it'll only be 20% of my sample portfolio. ~a
[2017-04-21 11:24:59] - a: Having said all that, I'm fine setting the limit lower. $500 million was completely arbitrary. gbtc, though, appears to be the type of ticker I was hoping to avoid.
-Paul[2017-04-21 11:24:04] - a: At work, they're trying to design a stock picking game. They had one before (CAPS, which is still up), but they found that it was kind of easy to game the system if you don't limit the ticker universe. Otherwise people pick these triple leveraged market funds or penny stocks. -Paul
[2017-04-21 11:21:46] - a: I figured excluding dividends solely to make the calculations easier, but I'm fine including them if we have an easy way of calculating it. I thought we could just do 5 evenly weighted stocks with a minimum market cap because I didn't want the winning strategy to be going all in on a penny stock.
-Paul[2017-04-21 11:16:34] - you know what, no. i own gbtc in real life. i think you should change the 500m to 200m so i can put in some gbtc. ~a
[2017-04-21 11:13:08] - awwww man gbtc market cap is 200m! probably for the best though. gbtc is totally cheating. ~a
[2017-04-21 11:13:00] - paul: yes. i say don't exclude dividends though. (out of curiosity do i have to have equal parts in each stock? or can i specify a weighting?) ~a
[2017-04-21 10:51:11] - a: (or anybody here), Interested in some sort of stock picking challenge? Something like we both pick 5 stocks and see whose portfolio has increased the most in one year (maybe excluding dividends and stocks under $500 million in market cap to keep things simple)? -Paul
[2017-04-21 09:44:46] - I have no idea what turnberry is, but it clicked with Tonberry, for some reason, probably the pretty similar letterings. Amsued me. -- Xpovos
[2017-04-20 13:59:22] - Not Xpovos but http://finalfantasy.wikia.com/wiki/Tonberry - Daniel
[2017-04-20 13:55:52] - Xpovos: I don't get it. -title
[2017-04-20 13:37:52] - title: http://i.imgur.com/T0vomNB.png -- Xpovos
[2017-04-20 11:06:48] - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vwVtydpE8Ps -Paul
[2017-04-20 10:45:01] - Wasn't there some other video of a tire coming out of nowhere to completely wipe out a pedestrian? -Paul
[2017-04-20 09:26:31] - That last one is probably a big factor in why the rich non-college do well, since we see so many examples of innovators forgoing college. The average person probably shouldn't; but then the average person probably isn't coming from those other areas (due to the other competing reasons). -- Xpovos
[2017-04-20 09:25:24] - a: There are a bunch of potential answers, that the Atlantic being a generally solid publication probably went into in more depth but I'll repeat a few anyway, including genetics, free capital--both time and money, access to a wide variety of factors that are known contributors, and likely family tendencies towards innovation rather than rote. -- Xpovos
[2017-04-20 09:20:59] - ignoring their conclusion of a title, dumb title. more interesting that, young people born to rich families who don't go to college are 3 times more likely to end up rich than young people born to poor families who do go college. ~a
[2017-04-20 09:16:38] - and the poor bicycle owner who's going to have no idea who broke a few parts off his bike.
~a[2017-04-20 09:06:34] - Xpovos: Yeah I thought it was pretty luck it just barely clipped that one guy who wasn't looking then ran into the table. Seems like it could have been much worse if it had been like 8 inches to the right. -Daniel
[2017-04-20 08:46:54] - a: That gif is pretty terrifying. The tire almost certainly came off a vehicle in an accident, but what a path. It's like a homing tire! -- Xpovos
[2017-04-19 15:58:48] - https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/bill-oreilly-is-officially-out-at-fox-news/2017/04/19/74ebdc94-2476-11e7-a1b3-faff0034e2de_story.html I'm sure you'll all need comforting hugs after reading this. - mig
[2017-04-19 15:27:11] - i used to watch ncis. a lot. and i know why mainstream america loves it. it's so fucking inoffensive. clever things make people feel stupid and unexpected things make them feel scared. ~a
[2017-04-19 15:20:48] - https://zippy.gfycat.com/InsistentSecondhandFlyingsquirrel.webm ~a
[2017-04-19 14:39:17] - http://www.economist.com/blogs/prospero/2015/09/television I think I found it. This is slightly different than the article that I remember, but my memory is probably faulty because I can't imagine there are two articles out there just like this. -Paul
[2017-04-19 12:04:25] - a: No problem. I can understand the confusion.
-Paul[2017-04-19 11:40:04] - i was wondering how you were going to tie-in tv shows.
~a[2017-04-19 11:39:42] - ah that is a different bubble sorry. ~a
[2017-04-19 11:21:07] - a: Hmmmm. Maybe we're talking about different bubbles? I'm not talking about bubbles like a real estate bubble or tulip bubble. I'm talking about a bubble like bubble boy, where people can't imagine how Trump could win because they all hang out with people who largely agree with them politically. Echo chamber is another word for it. -Paul
[2017-04-19 10:55:19] - paul: i hate your article already.
knowing which bubbles we are in would be nice, but it's (almost by definition) impossible to determine which bubbles exist ahead of time. it's synonymous with reliably predicting the market: if you could do that then you could also make infinite money. since nobody is making infinite money, nobody can reliably predict bubbles. ~a[2017-04-19 10:49:10] - a: I don't necessarily remember their conclusion (part of the reason I wanted to find it again). I'm interested in it because I was thinking of writing something for Rampant Discourse about bubbles. Not necessarily about how bubbles are bad, but that it is helpful to know which bubbles we are in. -Paul
[2017-04-19 10:43:23] - paul: i don't know about this article, but i wonder what the conclusion is (theirs or yours). what's wrong with talking about unpopular things? or underrated things? ~a
[2017-04-19 10:38:18] - Xpovos: Thanks! That isn't what I was referring to (it was an article in some other lesser known publication than the NYT, but it was about the NYT). I did find that one during my searches, though, and it does tangentially touch on what I am talking about. I guess it's a little more meta, though? -Paul
[2017-04-19 10:33:34] - OK, I think I found the article I recall. Probably not what you were after upon re-reading. But here you go. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/12/26/upshot/duck-dynasty-vs-modern-family-television-maps.html -- Xpovos
[2017-04-19 10:28:45] - Paul: I think I remember that article. Let me see if I can find it. IIRC, though, it was more recent than "a few years ago". So we might not be thinking the same thing. -- Xpovos
[2017-04-19 10:15:35] - But completely ignores shows that are much more popular (like Big Bang Theory and CIS). I'm trying to find that article again but have completely failed. Anybody have any suggestions on things I can try? -Paul
[2017-04-19 10:14:58] - Wondering if I can get some Google-fu advice here. There was an article online (not sure which site) that I read a few years ago which talked about how mainstream media (I think specifically the New York Times was name-checked) talks a lot about TV shows like Game of Thrones and Girls and Breaking Bad... -Paul
[2017-04-18 18:21:45] - aaron: not sure why it was usually 10 minutes for me. ~a
[2017-04-18 15:58:28] - https://draemm.li/various/place-atlas/?id=61 dunno if anybody else checked out reddit's r/place, but there's an interactive atlas which is pretty cool. r/place was a giant 1000x1000 canvas where any user could draw a single pixel -- but had to wait 5 minutes to draw a second pixel - aaron
[2017-04-18 13:36:30] - oh hahaha. i didn't realize that's what you were referring to. yeah totally. i'm sure we're close to their target demographic. i'm just being annoyed by their spamming tendencies. ~a
[2017-04-18 12:50:37] - Daniel: Yeah, I agree we're not near that place and we probably never will get to a place where we're close to 100% passive, but I guess I never considered that as more people go passive, the differences between companies would possibly be less pronounced. -Paul
[2017-04-18 12:35:50] - a: When it comes to discussing vi4gra or ci4lis? Isn't that the stereotype? Older people are more interested?
-Paul[2017-04-18 11:40:17] - articles*
[2017-04-18 11:39:59] - Paul: I've seen article that get all OMG IF WE ALL PASSIVELY INVEST THE MARKET WILL STOP WORKING AND THE WORLD WILL FAIL. However I think those all miss the point that we will never get to complete passive investing because as the market becomes more inefficient it will allow active management to actually do their job and provide value which would attract $. -Daniel
[2017-04-18 11:38:55] - daniel: yeah i tend to agree that 25% active is probably still enough. and we're still at . . . 60%. ~a
[2017-04-18 11:37:34] - "the average age of the message board user is definitely getting older" haha is the subtext here that peoples' opinions can change over time? ~a
[2017-04-18 11:37:02] - Paul: Then it would make more sense to start giving active managers more money until the point tipped back to being in indexing's favor. Presumably at some point the invisible hand will figure this out and we'll settle on like 35%? 45%? 25%? of the market being active investing. -Daniel
[2017-04-18 11:35:54] - Paul: late to the conversation but I do think that index investing (especially the big indexes, total market, s&p 500, etc) being the right choice depends on efficient market hypothesis which I think on some level does necessitate active investing. I think there would come a point where the market would become inefficient and the balance would tip back to active.
[2017-04-18 10:53:08] - a: Although, honestly, I think the premise might just be wrong. Like, I don't know if Olive Garden is 100x better than ramen, for instance. It's probably not a curve and instead is just a mostly straight line with a small slope. -Paul
[2017-04-18 10:51:47] - a: I think in general I still feel that way, yeah. Maybe it's because I like Olive Garden? Feel free to substitute your favorite casual dining restaurant instead. I've definitely had some really good meals that were really expensive, but I can think of a $50 meal I've had that was 3-4x as good as something from a place like Olive Garden. -Paul
[2017-04-18 10:49:42] - a: Hahaha, I dunno, the average age of the message board user is definitely getting older... -Paul
[2017-04-18 10:41:24] - paul: reading the subtitle, do you still feel this way? i've had some pretty expensive meals before and i pretty much hate the olive garden.
~a[2017-04-18 10:08:14] - hi guys, if you want to legitimately discuss viagra or cialis, please email me so i can adjust the filter. these spammer guys aren't falling for my normal tricks. ~a
[2017-04-17 17:04:19] - a: Yeah, sorry, I meant to include all of those (hedge funds, day traders, etc) in "active managers". I did forget about companies affecting their stocks with buybacks and whatnot, though. I'm also not worried. We're still super far away, but the trend seems pretty clear. -Paul
[2017-04-17 17:00:29] - "active managers to help price stocks". there's much more to it than that. besides active managers, there's also hedge funds. there's also day-traders. and even the companies themselves (since they're always permitted and encouraged to buy their own stock when they think the price is low). although i agree with you in principal: i'm not concerned *yet*. ~a
[2017-04-17 14:29:25] - a: Gotcha, yeah. I know my hypothetical is basically impossible, but that wasn't really the point. I was wondering what effect this flight to passively managed index funds might have on the market, since in a way, passively managed index funds rely on active managers to help price stocks. -Paul
[2017-04-17 14:22:23] - paul: more or less, yeah. but someone decides what goes in each index. s&p500, for instance, s&p decides what goes in and what doesn't. (their rule is pretty simple, though: largest stocks on NYSE and NASDAQ. so then it comes down to who decides what gets listed on NYSE and NASDAQ) ~a
[2017-04-17 12:49:11] - a: So to make it really simple, let's just say everybody is in an S&P500 index fund... ignoring the fact that suddenly all companies not in the S&P500 now have a market cap of 0... wouldn't every company in the S&P500 grow at the same rate then? -Paul
[2017-04-17 12:46:58] - a: Passive doesn't necessarily mean index, though, right? I am talking about passive index funds where there isn't somebody "deciding which stocks go into" them. Don't index funds just track an index? Wouldn't that just be an algorithm? -Paul
[2017-04-17 12:43:59] - paul: the market is currently ~60% active ~a
[2017-04-17 12:42:36] - paul: but i don't think that price-discovery will be correct enough. iow, i think everybody=passive is bad. as long as N% of the market is active, where N is much greater than 0, i think we'll be ok. ~a
[2017-04-17 12:42:33] - paul: yes, i agree with aaron. as long as someone is deciding which stocks go into which passive funds, then there will be at least *some* price-discovery. ~a
[2017-04-17 12:41:33] - Aaron: I guess what I was wondering is: If more and more people put their money into passively managed index funds who just try to match the market instead of beat the market, won't that start to make it so that the difference in the performance between "good" and "bad" companies becomes less pronounced? -Paul
[2017-04-17 12:40:10] - Aaron: Yeah, sorry, I guess I wasn't precise enough in what I meant. I was assuming a scenario where everybody had the same index fund (Vanguard total market?), but that seems even more unlikely than my already unlikely scenario. -Paul
[2017-04-17 12:20:24] - paul: said another way, the "every business would grow at the same rate" thing only really makes sense under the viewpoint that there is a single index fund which includes every stock.... but that's not my understanding of index funds - aaron
[2017-04-17 12:19:17] - paul: currently, a stock price goes up if more people want to buy it. with your idea, a stock price would go up if it was included by more different index funds. so rather than businesses trying to appeal to stockholders, they'd be solely trying to appeal to organizations responsible for managing index funds - aaron
[2017-04-17 12:02:35] - Random thought: Let's assume that magically tomorrow EVERYBODY has switched to investing via passively managed index funds. How would that work? If nobody is actively investing in businesses, wouldn't every business just grow at the same rate regardless of underlying fundamentals since all the money goes into each stock equally? -Paul
[2017-04-17 11:10:04] - a: But I don't know if that counts dividends, so I still just use my Scottrade account statements to see how my portfolio is doing overall. -Paul
[2017-04-17 11:09:36] - a: I don't know if I would say it has caused me problems, but I've been surprised there isn't a tool that handles all these relatively common scenarios better. I use Google Finance to get a very basic idea of how my portfolio is doing, and then use the Motley Fool scorecard feature to see how individual stocks are doing against the S&P. -Paul
[2017-04-17 10:35:20] - yeah, i doubt i'll stop using google finance and yahoo finance though. which means . . . i'm sure i'll be bit by the "dividends ignored" problem again some time in the future. how about you? has this caused you problems before? ~a
[2017-04-17 10:30:06] - a: Cool. I'll have to check them out. Thanks! -Paul
[2017-04-14 10:04:18] - with stockcharts when you compare almost anything to the s&p500 it looks (incorrectly) like all of these funds are majorly out-performing the market (djia and s&p500 don't report dividends). and that seems weird, because this whole time we were ignoring dividends, and how they affect results. ~a
[2017-04-14 09:58:12] - paul: from yahoo and google when i compare fagox with vtsax, it looks like fagox took a major hit in december. which, of course, is a major misunderstanding of the data! december is when these funds often have dividends. ~a
[2017-04-14 09:55:49] - paul: stockcharts.com shows dividends reinvested by default (aka total return). i like perfchart, it's pretty sweet. w/ dividends included, you can actually compare stocks with each-other. i can't seem to be able to do that from any other website. yahoo, no, google, no, marketwatch, no. ~a
[2017-04-11 16:31:06] - paul:
yeah it cracked me the hell up. so many things going on. i probably shouldn't watch them at work either! - aaron[2017-04-11 14:16:18] - paul/aaron: yeah, i was in a conference call and i had to quickly close that window to keep from laughing. ~a
[2017-04-11 13:29:13] - aaron: I probably shouldn't watch those at work. Too hard to not laugh.
-Paul[2017-04-11 13:25:21] - https://i.imgur.com/7giuESp.gifv i'm here to help - aaron
[2017-04-10 14:14:53] - paul: ideally the tank's out in front engaging and catching people out of position, the assassins are in the middle following up on the tank's engagements, and the supports are safe in the back. you can run off as an assassin to try and chase someone down and get a kill, or try to solo a merc camp, but that's when people complain that you're being weird - aaron
[2017-04-10 14:09:18] - paul: yeah it takes practice to keep track of the enemy team, and know when to engage. but past level 10 if you just follow your team's tank around the map, (or follow the other tank if you're Artanis), and engage when they engage, nobody has any right to complain - aaron
[2017-04-10 13:57:41] - Paul: Gall of Cho'Gall? -Daniel
[2017-04-10 13:46:07] - Maybe I should just learn to play Abathur and leave it at that.
-Paul[2017-04-10 13:40:37] - aaron: I am horrible, absolutely horrible, of knowing when to engage and when not to. For starters, I never seem to know when big team battles are going on. Even when I miraculously show up, I always seem to charge in right as everybody is retreating. So many times I charge in fearlessly only to have people ask, "WTF were you doing? It was 3v5..." -Paul
[2017-04-10 13:35:37] - paul: yeah I'd have to check the replay but I think it was like a sustained 9-person skirmish between the two immortals - aaron
[2017-04-10 12:25:09] - aaron: Yeah, which is pretty much what I do (except I sometimes miss that the objectives are up and just stay pushing lanes). Although, honestly, I wasn't quite sure what I was supposed to be doing at the time he called me a bot. I guess there was a team fight going on that I was supposed to be participating in? -Paul
[2017-04-10 12:22:48] - paul: yeah, learning to glance down at the minimap every frequently so you know where everyone is important. that's sort of why that guy called you out for being a bot during our first Battlefield Of Eternity match -- bots ignore the minimap, they tunnel-vision on objectives unless their core is literally under attack - aaron
[2017-04-10 11:02:09] - aaron: I think I need to learn where opposing heroes are and what they are doing and when to stop pushing and go for a mercenary camp or try to help another lane or something. -Paul
[2017-04-10 11:01:17] - aaron: *Sigh*, but pushing lanes is how I play the game.
I do think I need to practice some on recognizing when mercenary camps are available and when I can take them. For example, soloing them as Li Ming did not work well. I honestly think my biggest weakness is game state recognition and knowing when to stop pushing lanes. -Paul[2017-04-10 10:59:44] - paul: you will learn that there are nightmarish matchups -- like as Valla i kept getting terrorized by Alarak and Kerrigan because they have burst/stun/silence combos on short cooldowns. but then you will learn how to counterplay them, because the AI is very reliable at firing off their combos every time - aaron
[2017-04-10 10:57:52] - paul: yeah, pushing lanes and taking mercenary camps wins AI games but it is kind of cheesy
honestly if you want to figure out how to avoid being "cheesed" as valla, you should try playing against the hardest bots you can, and try getting literally as much hero damage as you possibly can. go to every fight, stay in lane, ignore mercs, don't die - aaron[2017-04-10 10:56:49] - paul: for example, i can carry as malfurion and xul because they can do a lot of damage, secure kills, and 1v1 a lot of heroes in lane. i can not carry as morales or ETC because their damage is low and they cannot secure kills. i still win most AI games but some are unwinnable with those kinds of heroes - aaron
[2017-04-10 10:55:35] - aaron: And so then I switched to Valla, Zagara, Li Ming and Jaina (I had a quest to play 3 games as an assassin) and won all four by basically just pushing lanes and taking mercenary camps. -Paul
[2017-04-10 10:54:41] - paul: personally when i play AI vs AI games, it is to learn to handle a hero mechanically, so i have a "code of ethics" where I specifically engage every hero possible, try to maximize hero damage, and never take any merc camps. with these rules, i'm able to carry elite games with all assassins, most specialists, and some tanks and supports - aaron
[2017-04-10 10:54:27] - aaron: Hehe, that's what I found out. My first game I was tracer and, while I didn't play poorly, I felt like the AIs were too conservative all around to where I was never able to kill anybody and wasn't contributing much (since Tracer isn't good at taking camps or doing objectives or wave clearing) and I lost badly. -Paul
[2017-04-10 10:53:23] - a: And of course, this merged with my interest in getting solar panels, so I was hoping maybe if I could reduce our energy usage enough, we could take ourselves (mostly) off the grid. Didn't really work like that, but a man can dream. -Paul
[2017-04-10 10:53:12] - paul: as far as carrying AI games, it depends on your role, and how you are playing the game. as an assassin/specialist/tank capable of taking merc camps, you should be able to win any AI game with bot allies simply by taking every mercenary camp, focusing on destroying their stuctures, and avoiding direct conflict - aaron
[2017-04-10 10:52:33] - a: Because that might mean you can spend less on a smaller HVAC system. Supposedly it's more efficient to get a system which is just the right size for a house versus something too big because it's better for the system to work hard all the time instead of half-assing it some of the time. -Paul
[2017-04-10 10:51:31] - a: I get weirdly obsessed with things sometimes. This all started with us needing a new HVAC system, and when I mentioned it to Matt Herndon (asking if he had any suggestions on things to research) he suggested an energy audit because now is a good time to try to insulate the house... -Paul
[2017-04-10 10:26:56] - paul: ok sounds pretty comparable considering my house is smaller. my electric bill average is 130 (60 to 280) and my gas bill average is 70 (10 to 170). i've been making small changes here and there, but nothing as major as re-insulating my attic. ~a
[2017-04-10 10:15:29] - Daniel: Definitely, and I hope that's the case. I never watch the show, but I thought I had heard good things about her hosting abilities. -Paul
[2017-04-10 09:51:42] - Paul: I'm unfamiliar with her political views but its possible there is a legit reason that non NBA fans don't really get and that ESPN doesn't want to call her out on? -Daniel
[2017-04-10 09:50:58] - Paul: As another thought on the Sage Steele thing I know that a lot of NBA fans didn't like her as a host because they thought she wasn't much fun and didn't let the other host people go on rants or have random fun discussions. Basically people want it to be more like TNT cause everyone likes that one (mostly) and felt like she was an impediment to that. -Daniel
[2017-04-10 09:48:49] - a: Hiring the company to blow in insulation (and do some other work to seal up the house better) is the expensive part. That is going to cost a few thousand dollars.
-Paulprev <-> next