"At around $4 a subscriber, ESPN is the most expensive channel in the cable business"
That includes all of the non-sports fans paying for other channels in the same package. It is hard to estimate $ per sports fan subscriber and match it with value per sports fan subscriber, hence no a la carte, access how you want to ESPN offer.
The point where the parent meson produces a neutrino in the decay tunnel is unknown. However, this introduces a negligible inaccuracy in the neutrino time of flight measurement, because the produced mesons are also travelling with nearly the speed of light. By a full LUKA based simulation of the CNGS beam [14] it was shown that the time difference computed assuming a particle moving at the speed of light from the neutrino production target down to LNGS, with respect to the value derived by taking into account the speed of the relativistic parent meson down to its decay point is less than 0.2 ns.... More details on the muon identificationprocedure are given in [15].
[14] FLUKA software package: http://www.fluka.org/ CNGS neutrino flux calculations: http://www.mi.infn.it/~psala/Icarus/cngs.html ; G. Battistoni et al., AIP Conference Proceedings, 896m (2007) 31. [15] OPERA Collaboration, N. Agafanova et al., New J. Phys. 13 (2011) 053051.
they started in NJ, not CA so you don't have to have crazy environmental laws to make solar make economic sense
Clearly you know little about NJ DEP environmental laws, the recent SREC bubble and the political machine in my home state. SunEdison exists because of minimum requirements of renewable and solar sources on NJ power generation which was copied in other states.
Its not a good economic policy to try and smooth over anything but the shallowest dips. It just kicks the can down the road, at great cost.
Wow! I'm surprised that you haven't won at least a Nobel Prize for your work on economic policy. Please post a link to your work so the world can benefit.
If you visit muninetworks.org, you can read some of the stories about how cable companies have successfully sued or lobbied to have laws changed in order to prevent other options.
Some variations that may be better in some locations: Municipally owed cables or conduits that independent organizations can lease access to provide internet service. Mutual (cooperative) ownership of the cable and or internet service provider by customers and possibly employees.
The Al Jezeera "news" article is about what Obama is expected to announce today:
Barack Obama, the US president, is expected to seek a new minimum tax rate for the wealthy to ensure they pay at least the same percentage as middle-income taxpayers.... A White House official, who declined to be named because the plan has not been officially announced, said the new rate is part of Obama's proposal for long-term deficit reduction that he will announce on Monday.
The AP article is about the American Jobs Act proposal that President Obama sent to Congress on September 12, 2011:
It would let Bush-era tax cuts for upper income earners expire, limit deductions for wealthier filers and close loopholes and end some corporate tax breaks.
I recognized one of the loopholes (the classification of investment management compensation as capital gains) as an issue complained about here on Slashdot.
The Whitehouse.gov site has no new announcements, statements, or releases about changes or addenda to the American Jobs Act posted today. However, it does have a statement and report from the Office of Management and Budget about the American Jobs Act. But no proposals of new tax brackets.
So what are we discussing? I suspect the conversation has merged the separate issues and stories into an incomprehensible clusterfuck to the disservice of everyone engaged.
Also the survey was only given to actively enrolled college students. Without looking, I assume that the majority are freshmen and self identify as liberal.
That survey is bias and very uninformative. I would bet that your answer would be scored as incorrect even though you recognize that there is a conditional answer. You would be forced choose between 1) strongly agree; 2) somewhat agree; 3) somewhat disagree; 4) strongly disagree; 5) are not sure, you might be tempted to choose 3. I would argue that the correct answer to many of the survey questions is 5 due to lack of information or ambiguity in the questions.
For example:
5) Third World workers working for American companies overseas are being exploited (unenlightened answer: agree).
So I'm supposed to agree that there are no such workers being exploited; there is no undocumented slavery connected to any American company? I'm supposed to agree on the surveyor's definition of exploitation?
This is not to say that self identified liberals aren't less knowledgeable of economic theory or data. I'm simply saying that the survey is poorly designed.
You may want to read Mr Murphy's response to commenters John and Jim Glass. It seems that his intent was to show that the assumptions he used were absurd but illustrative of a helpful framework to address energy and economic issues on a 50 or 100 or 200 year time scales.
Absolutely correct. Also if you start buying a large amount of tickets you can significantly change the expected value calculation. So you are stuck with few opportunities to invest in a high variance investment with a positive expected value that you can expect never to reach in several lifetimes. There are also better returns for available (with lower variance) for people willing and able to invest enough money to see a payoff from Powerball. Also, I don't recall taxes being considered in the paper's analysis. That would only make the expected value worse.
After reading this, I have decided only to play when the Jackpot is over $350 Million (i.e. less than $5 dollars per year). Before, I played when it was at $200 Million or more using the same logic you were using.
My favorite quote from the article: "This would require hundreds of billions of dollars (which we don’t have) and hundreds of billions of opportunities to play Powerball when the jackpot is high. Even if we buy hundreds or thousands or even millions of tickets when the expectation is positive, we will probably die long before we are ahead."...and you would still have a 1 in 20 (5%) chance of a negative return.
Re:Could Someone Help Me Out With This?
on
Debt Deal Reached
·
· Score: 1
The current GDP level is depressed from trend and potential growth. Much of the increase in spending is the result of automatic safety nets (social security, unemployment, medicare, medicaid, etc.) that increases by design when a recession occurs. If GDP levels return to trend, the high % of debt to GDP will automatically drop as the numerator grows slower than the denominator.
Also GDP is an annualized measure. Duration of USA debt is something near 20 years.
FYI: It all about the variance and propensity of higher ticket sales when jackpots rise that makes the positive EV Powerball strategy a relatively poor one. See: http://glodime.posterous.com/48001751
Slashdot Mirror
"At around $4 a subscriber, ESPN is the most expensive channel in the cable business"
That includes all of the non-sports fans paying for other channels in the same package. It is hard to estimate $ per sports fan subscriber and match it with value per sports fan subscriber, hence no a la carte, access how you want to ESPN offer.
My money is on an error in the use of a Gaussian function and Monte Carlo simulation to explain most of the bias. A software bug maybe?
That is ridiculous. That would require that someone will name their son Zefram 21 years from now (2032).
From the OPERA paper:
The point where the parent meson produces a neutrino in the decay tunnel is unknown. However, this introduces a negligible inaccuracy in the neutrino time of flight measurement, because the produced mesons are also travelling with nearly the speed of light. By a full LUKA based simulation of the CNGS beam [14] it was shown that the time difference computed assuming a particle moving at the speed of light from the neutrino production target down to LNGS, with respect to the value derived by taking into account the speed of the relativistic parent meson down to its decay point is less than 0.2 ns. ... More details on the muon identificationprocedure are given in [15].
[14] FLUKA software package: http://www.fluka.org/ CNGS neutrino flux calculations:
http://www.mi.infn.it/~psala/Icarus/cngs.html ; G. Battistoni et al., AIP Conference Proceedings, 896m (2007) 31.
[15] OPERA Collaboration, N. Agafanova et al., New J. Phys. 13 (2011) 053051.
Thanks for asking the question though. It was my first thought when I read the /. summary. I learned a bit from the answers.
You're ignorant.
You're welcome.
they started in NJ, not CA so you don't have to have crazy environmental laws to make solar make economic sense
Clearly you know little about NJ DEP environmental laws, the recent SREC bubble and the political machine in my home state. SunEdison exists because of minimum requirements of renewable and solar sources on NJ power generation which was copied in other states.
Its not a good economic policy to try and smooth over anything but the shallowest dips. It just kicks the can down the road, at great cost.
Wow! I'm surprised that you haven't won at least a Nobel Prize for your work on economic policy. Please post a link to your work so the world can benefit.
If you visit muninetworks.org, you can read some of the stories about how cable companies have successfully sued or lobbied to have laws changed in order to prevent other options.
Seems to work in a number of municipalities where the courts allow it. See: http://www.muninetworks.org/
Some variations that may be better in some locations:
Municipally owed cables or conduits that independent organizations can lease access to provide internet service.
Mutual (cooperative) ownership of the cable and or internet service provider by customers and possibly employees.
This bill is dead on arrival
What bill?
The Al Jezeera "news" article is about what Obama is expected to announce today:
Barack Obama, the US president, is expected to seek a new minimum tax rate for the wealthy to ensure they pay at least the same percentage as middle-income taxpayers. ... A White House official, who declined to be named because the plan has not been officially announced, said the new rate is part of Obama's proposal for long-term deficit reduction that he will announce on Monday.
The AP article is about the American Jobs Act proposal that President Obama sent to Congress on September 12, 2011:
It would let Bush-era tax cuts for upper income earners expire, limit deductions for wealthier filers and close loopholes and end some corporate tax breaks.
I recognized one of the loopholes (the classification of investment management compensation as capital gains) as an issue complained about here on Slashdot.
The Whitehouse.gov site has no new announcements, statements, or releases about changes or addenda to the American Jobs Act posted today. However, it does have a statement and report from the Office of Management and Budget about the American Jobs Act. But no proposals of new tax brackets.
There have been a number of proposals regarding the taxing of incomes over $1 million as Ezra Klein has noted. But none from President Obama. (Regarding new marginal tax rates, I find House Representative Jan Schakowsky's proposal the most straight forward and reasonable, assuming that the government favors increasing taxes on incomes over $1 million.)
So what are we discussing? I suspect the conversation has merged the separate issues and stories into an incomprehensible clusterfuck to the disservice of everyone engaged.
First, companies don't pay taxes. Their customers do.
... or their employees (or potential employees) or their shareholders do. Tax incidence is not limited to customers.
You should read what Nate Silver had to say about that survey:
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2010/06/are-you-smarter-than-george-mason.html
Also the survey was only given to actively enrolled college students. Without looking, I assume that the majority are freshmen and self identify as liberal.
That survey is bias and very uninformative. I would bet that your answer would be scored as incorrect even though you recognize that there is a conditional answer. You would be forced choose between 1) strongly agree; 2) somewhat agree; 3) somewhat disagree; 4) strongly disagree; 5) are not sure, you might be tempted to choose 3. I would argue that the correct answer to many of the survey questions is 5 due to lack of information or ambiguity in the questions.
For example:
5) Third World workers working for American companies overseas are being exploited (unenlightened answer: agree).
So I'm supposed to agree that there are no such workers being exploited; there is no undocumented slavery connected to any American company? I'm supposed to agree on the surveyor's definition of exploitation?
This is not to say that self identified liberals aren't less knowledgeable of economic theory or data. I'm simply saying that the survey is poorly designed.
Love it - hate it - or just use it ---- iTunes has been there for 10yrs (an eon in tech time) ..... surrender, it just works .....
You misspelled BitTorrent.
No
You may want to read Mr Murphy's response to commenters John and Jim Glass. It seems that his intent was to show that the assumptions he used were absurd but illustrative of a helpful framework to address energy and economic issues on a 50 or 100 or 200 year time scales.
How could the Daily Mail sell advertisements if they actually had information? No speculation = no revenue.
Absolutely correct. Also if you start buying a large amount of tickets you can significantly change the expected value calculation. So you are stuck with few opportunities to invest in a high variance investment with a positive expected value that you can expect never to reach in several lifetimes. There are also better returns for available (with lower variance) for people willing and able to invest enough money to see a payoff from Powerball. Also, I don't recall taxes being considered in the paper's analysis. That would only make the expected value worse.
After reading this, I have decided only to play when the Jackpot is over $350 Million (i.e. less than $5 dollars per year). Before, I played when it was at $200 Million or more using the same logic you were using.
My favorite quote from the article: "This would require hundreds of billions of dollars (which we don’t have) and hundreds of billions of opportunities to play Powerball when the jackpot is high. Even if we buy hundreds or thousands or even millions of tickets when the expectation is positive, we will probably die long before we are ahead." ...and you would still have a 1 in 20 (5%) chance of a negative return.
Whoosh is informative.
The current GDP level is depressed from trend and potential growth. Much of the increase in spending is the result of automatic safety nets (social security, unemployment, medicare, medicaid, etc.) that increases by design when a recession occurs. If GDP levels return to trend, the high % of debt to GDP will automatically drop as the numerator grows slower than the denominator.
Also GDP is an annualized measure. Duration of USA debt is something near 20 years.
The article mentions that $1.6 million needs to be invested to guarantee a win.
It isn't quite as simple as you put it for Powerball expected values. See: http://glodime.posterous.com/48001751
FYI: It all about the variance and propensity of higher ticket sales when jackpots rise that makes the positive EV Powerball strategy a relatively poor one.
See: http://glodime.posterous.com/48001751