Which means you do not understand. Which was my point from the start.
The only reason stocks follow markers is because investors follow markers. As investing is becoming democratized, that will go away, and outliers will not only be more common, but will drive the market instead of the markers.
People who buy Tesla stock now buy it on the expectation that others will continue to find it valuable.
All this nonsense about "highly valued" and "represents" are red herrings. Stock value is not in any way dependent on the state of the company they are labeled with (with the exception of if it goes out of business). All they are dependent on his what people will pay for them.
All this armchair analysis about how the company is doing, and market cap, and profits, and other such nonsense is entirely irrelevant. All that matters is what people are prepared to pay.
Nothing else. Literally nothing else, what so ever.
So no, the stock will not go down. People love the idea of the underdog too much.
There is a huge difference. If I plug an encrypted drive into my unencrypted system and view a few images, and then take the encrypted drive out and shut my system down, I expect a very low risk of any decrypted information remaining on my machine. Especially if I have taken the precaution of letting my tmp directory get wiped on shutdown.
And I will definitely not expect decrypted information which will show up directly in the file manager, as immediately viewable.
But here, there will be. The thumbnails are in a predictable location, and they are easy to access. No special tools needed.
All security can be defeated, but the barriers are not all equally high.
There will be no constant swapping. Multidisk games for the Amiga were pretty much uniformly very smart about that. And swapping disks in the emulator is a keypress away, it's really smooth and simple.
Patching will not require a hard disk install; usually installing to hard disk on the Amiga means copying the files over. There is no registry, not even any ini files, just a directory with files. You can patch those files and put them on the disks again, or even patch on the disks.
It's very far from a typical step. It's almost completely unheard of. And it is very amusing you complain about "emulate the AmigaOS API" since games do not use AmigaOS. They go directly on the hardware.
The only reason you had to "faff with it" was because you decided to do you. Seriously, don't blame the Amiga for something the Amiga makes dead simple, and the amulator makes dead simple, but which you decided to make difficult.
Running Amiga games on an Amiga emulator makes DOSbox seem complicated. What you did was the equivalent of installing Windows 3.1 on DOSbox to be able to run a pure DOS game.
That sounds like a very strange way to run an Amiga game. Amiga games almost never ran from Workbench. In fact, I know of no game which required an install and then running from Workbench.
Normally you had an Amiga, with Kickstart in ROM, and you booted from the first game disk. That was it. And that is how it's still done on the emulator.
Installing OS and then game is a very roundabout way, and not normal. I can understand you had problems since you did something hardly anyone has ever done in the history of the Amiga!
Nobody is handing money to Musk. That is not how stocks work.
And that is why you're wrong. It is immaterial how successful Tesla becomes. Completely immaterial. All that matters is how much people are prepared to pay for the stock. And that money does not go to Musk. It goes to whoever they bought the stock from.
Your statement about "overpaid" once again assumes a rational market. There is no such thing. Your conclusion is drawn from false premises, and false equivalents.
You're making one huge assumption here, namely that stock price is directly linked to how big or successful a company is.
It isn't. There is no such connection at all. The only thing determining a stock price is how much people are prepared to pay. That's *it*.
So unless Tesla goes under, the stocks will be worth what people are prepared to pay for them. And unless you have a set of mind-control orbital satellites which can make people sane and rational when determining what they will pay for stocks, there is absolutely no guarantee a short on Tesla will pay off, even if they remain a tiny company.
Your organs do vastly different things, and they all act as one supporting your body's ability to obey your commands and get the things you want done, done.
That is what is missing with the computers of the world today. They are like a huge pile of organs in your analogy. You are not. Or so one would hope anyway.;)
Your little * there is supremely important. ALL taxes modify behaviour. And that is why it actually matters quite a lot where the taxes come from.
Your reasoning is correct in that on average, actual purchasing power will remain roughly constant with a shifting around in taxes. But that is not the point. The point is where the purchasing power gets distributed. And that is why placing taxes in the right places matter quite a lot.
Stallman doesn't stop at software. In fact, the whole GNU concept began around a printer. Anything which you are not allowed to take apart to see how it's done qualifies. Your hammer does not, nor your table saw, because nothing stops you from disassembling, reassembling and figuring out how they work.
And Stallman says "just" in the sense of "only", not in a negative sense. On the contrary, he has never shown any disrespect to the kernel developers and their achievements. The only thing he does not show respect for is acceptance of closed licenses.
You cannot be serious, what professional developer in his right mind would use Notepad?
Any developer having to do a change of an ini file or script on a locked down machine where no user software can be installed, such as a machine in a production environment or factory.
And any developer who has to guide a user in such a change over the phone or a remote connection.
Making Notepad actually useful is a huge step in reducing the pain of maintaining Windows based automation and enterprise solutions.
Even if it costs 100 times as much per ton with current production methods, learning what works and does not work is useful because production methods tend to improve - often tremendously - when scaled.
In this case, since we want to bind carbon anyway, this could be an excellent - and at the end of the day cost efficient - way to do so compared to doing something less productive with the carbon while manufacturing concrete in the oldfashioned way.
How will we know? From these people "wasting their time" learning about this method.
I do not know the future, but I know the present. I dive among coral reefs, and the death of them is not something made up to scare people. It is not change. It is destruction. There is nothing there to replace the corals, and even if there were, it would take centuries.
Meanwhile you buy propaganda as fact, and use it to reassure yourself that the death of entire species, and the collapse of the birthing ground of 25% of large marine life is simply scare tactics.
People like you are why we are doomed as a species. And you don't even care about that. On the contrary, you revel in your ignorance and celebrate how woke you are to trust those who profit from the collapse.
And the killing off of a huge portion of the marine biomass falls under a dumb reason to take action as well, I take it.
Or no, you won't believe in that either, because of some other graph comparing two different things as if they were equal in order to mislead you, which you take at face value.
Meanwhile I have seen it with my own eyes, but hey, saying that to someone is being nasty, right?
I know what they are; we have them as well. They are not negotiated with the government, but with the unions. And you can always negotiate an exception, as long as you are not in a union.
We have one of those where I work, and I have an exception for maximum allowed overtime.
I am lodging no claims, merely presenting my conclusion drawn from reading the paper. Again, if the author does not want the paper to seem that way, then the author is free to not write it so it seems that way.
But you do what you feel is right, no skin off my back.
Besides, I have no question. I know enough about Corbyn without that event. His magnificent string of failures are highly public. That particular event is nothing compared to how his company fared before it went public, or to how badly his public predictions have missed. If he had a string of luck back then, that luck has long since run out.
Slashdot Mirror
Which means you do not understand. Which was my point from the start.
The only reason stocks follow markers is because investors follow markers. As investing is becoming democratized, that will go away, and outliers will not only be more common, but will drive the market instead of the markers.
And outliers are becoming the norm, and you'd be a fucking idiot to pretend otherwise.
People who buy Tesla stock now buy it on the expectation that others will continue to find it valuable.
All this nonsense about "highly valued" and "represents" are red herrings. Stock value is not in any way dependent on the state of the company they are labeled with (with the exception of if it goes out of business). All they are dependent on his what people will pay for them.
All this armchair analysis about how the company is doing, and market cap, and profits, and other such nonsense is entirely irrelevant. All that matters is what people are prepared to pay.
Nothing else. Literally nothing else, what so ever.
So no, the stock will not go down. People love the idea of the underdog too much.
There is a huge difference. If I plug an encrypted drive into my unencrypted system and view a few images, and then take the encrypted drive out and shut my system down, I expect a very low risk of any decrypted information remaining on my machine. Especially if I have taken the precaution of letting my tmp directory get wiped on shutdown.
And I will definitely not expect decrypted information which will show up directly in the file manager, as immediately viewable.
But here, there will be. The thumbnails are in a predictable location, and they are easy to access. No special tools needed.
All security can be defeated, but the barriers are not all equally high.
There will be no constant swapping. Multidisk games for the Amiga were pretty much uniformly very smart about that. And swapping disks in the emulator is a keypress away, it's really smooth and simple.
Patching will not require a hard disk install; usually installing to hard disk on the Amiga means copying the files over. There is no registry, not even any ini files, just a directory with files. You can patch those files and put them on the disks again, or even patch on the disks.
It's very far from a typical step. It's almost completely unheard of. And it is very amusing you complain about "emulate the AmigaOS API" since games do not use AmigaOS. They go directly on the hardware.
The only reason you had to "faff with it" was because you decided to do you. Seriously, don't blame the Amiga for something the Amiga makes dead simple, and the amulator makes dead simple, but which you decided to make difficult.
Running Amiga games on an Amiga emulator makes DOSbox seem complicated. What you did was the equivalent of installing Windows 3.1 on DOSbox to be able to run a pure DOS game.
That sounds like a very strange way to run an Amiga game. Amiga games almost never ran from Workbench. In fact, I know of no game which required an install and then running from Workbench.
Normally you had an Amiga, with Kickstart in ROM, and you booted from the first game disk. That was it. And that is how it's still done on the emulator.
Installing OS and then game is a very roundabout way, and not normal. I can understand you had problems since you did something hardly anyone has ever done in the history of the Amiga!
You say this as if it is a bad thing.
You know how these stock investments will get "wiped out"? By people selling them, freeing up capital to use for other things.
In other words, the market working as intended.
Which cashless app is that? The one everyone uses here in Sweden is Swish, and it is Swedish owned.
"Market opportunities" mean nothing.
The price of the stock is only tied to the results of Tesla in one way; if Tesla goes under, the stock will vanish from the market.
In all other ways, the price of the stock is connected ONLY to what people are prepared to pay for it.
Not to "market opportunities". Not to being a "good value stock". To NOTHING but what people are prepared to pay for it.
You say "beyond any rational behaviour". Yes, that is where it STARTS. Not where it ends. The behaviour of the stock market is NEVER rational. At all.
Thus, your prediction is meaningless.
Nobody is handing money to Musk. That is not how stocks work.
And that is why you're wrong. It is immaterial how successful Tesla becomes. Completely immaterial. All that matters is how much people are prepared to pay for the stock. And that money does not go to Musk. It goes to whoever they bought the stock from.
Your statement about "overpaid" once again assumes a rational market. There is no such thing. Your conclusion is drawn from false premises, and false equivalents.
You're making one huge assumption here, namely that stock price is directly linked to how big or successful a company is.
It isn't. There is no such connection at all. The only thing determining a stock price is how much people are prepared to pay. That's *it*.
So unless Tesla goes under, the stocks will be worth what people are prepared to pay for them. And unless you have a set of mind-control orbital satellites which can make people sane and rational when determining what they will pay for stocks, there is absolutely no guarantee a short on Tesla will pay off, even if they remain a tiny company.
That... is so not how it works. But you win an award, haven't read anything even remotely as eye-roll worthy all week!
Nobody thinks it was the American people. Everyone thinks it was the US. And the US is who is now not trusted.
Nothing more, nothing less.
At a macro level, we are an organism consisting of organs, and we have agency and capability to form and follow goals.
That is what can not be said about computers. At the macro level they are just a pile of computers.
Outside the US this is seen as the US making a promise, then the US not keeping it.
That's it. Nothing more, nothing less.
And that means we now know the US will make promises the US will not keep.
That's it. Nothing more, nothing less.
Your organs do vastly different things, and they all act as one supporting your body's ability to obey your commands and get the things you want done, done.
That is what is missing with the computers of the world today. They are like a huge pile of organs in your analogy. You are not. Or so one would hope anyway. ;)
Your little * there is supremely important. ALL taxes modify behaviour. And that is why it actually matters quite a lot where the taxes come from.
Your reasoning is correct in that on average, actual purchasing power will remain roughly constant with a shifting around in taxes. But that is not the point. The point is where the purchasing power gets distributed. And that is why placing taxes in the right places matter quite a lot.
Stallman doesn't stop at software. In fact, the whole GNU concept began around a printer. Anything which you are not allowed to take apart to see how it's done qualifies. Your hammer does not, nor your table saw, because nothing stops you from disassembling, reassembling and figuring out how they work.
And Stallman says "just" in the sense of "only", not in a negative sense. On the contrary, he has never shown any disrespect to the kernel developers and their achievements. The only thing he does not show respect for is acceptance of closed licenses.
You cannot be serious, what professional developer in his right mind would use Notepad?
Any developer having to do a change of an ini file or script on a locked down machine where no user software can be installed, such as a machine in a production environment or factory.
And any developer who has to guide a user in such a change over the phone or a remote connection.
Making Notepad actually useful is a huge step in reducing the pain of maintaining Windows based automation and enterprise solutions.
Even if it costs 100 times as much per ton with current production methods, learning what works and does not work is useful because production methods tend to improve - often tremendously - when scaled.
In this case, since we want to bind carbon anyway, this could be an excellent - and at the end of the day cost efficient - way to do so compared to doing something less productive with the carbon while manufacturing concrete in the oldfashioned way.
How will we know? From these people "wasting their time" learning about this method.
I do not know the future, but I know the present. I dive among coral reefs, and the death of them is not something made up to scare people. It is not change. It is destruction. There is nothing there to replace the corals, and even if there were, it would take centuries.
Meanwhile you buy propaganda as fact, and use it to reassure yourself that the death of entire species, and the collapse of the birthing ground of 25% of large marine life is simply scare tactics.
People like you are why we are doomed as a species. And you don't even care about that. On the contrary, you revel in your ignorance and celebrate how woke you are to trust those who profit from the collapse.
Was that being nasty enough?
Americans. Right. It's all about Americans.
And the killing off of a huge portion of the marine biomass falls under a dumb reason to take action as well, I take it.
Or no, you won't believe in that either, because of some other graph comparing two different things as if they were equal in order to mislead you, which you take at face value.
Meanwhile I have seen it with my own eyes, but hey, saying that to someone is being nasty, right?
So you keep seeing comparisons between upper atmosphere measurements and land models?
Small wonder you're not convinced. Or that you're red.
I know what they are; we have them as well. They are not negotiated with the government, but with the unions. And you can always negotiate an exception, as long as you are not in a union.
We have one of those where I work, and I have an exception for maximum allowed overtime.
I am lodging no claims, merely presenting my conclusion drawn from reading the paper. Again, if the author does not want the paper to seem that way, then the author is free to not write it so it seems that way.
But you do what you feel is right, no skin off my back.
Besides, I have no question. I know enough about Corbyn without that event. His magnificent string of failures are highly public. That particular event is nothing compared to how his company fared before it went public, or to how badly his public predictions have missed. If he had a string of luck back then, that luck has long since run out.