oil will be back in the triple digits soon enough, almost definitely by Memorial Day.
Almost definitely? You know if you're that sure you could make enough money to retire by buying oil futures. It's not as predicable as you make it out to be.
You have to understand. Brad is old and forgets things. You can tell by his user ID. So to him, these jokes aren't redundant, it's like they're bran....hang on, what were we talking about?
If you invested in the "bubbling" Uber earlier and sold out now you would be anything other than poor or stupid.
So your strategy is to buy things that are going to go up in price? That's a really good one. Let me write that down.
Anybody can look back and see what they should have done. That's not a difficult skill to master. The hard part is doing it going forward. That's really hard.
<Cue the anecdotes from people who bought Uber early. That's not data.>
This really shows how much these corporations really want their customers to be happy. and get all the best they possible could offer.
The only thing it shows is that in 2008 they filed for a patent. Every company doing any R&D does the same thing all the time. Anything it "shows" beyond that comes from you.
I would suggest that making half as many mistakes gains you about 600 rating points
I think the big problem is that a "mistake" is being defined so crudely. I'll bet players make about the same number of mistakes no matter how good they are, but what they actually qualify as a mistake gets smaller and smaller.
It's certainly true for me. I play at about a 1900 level now and was 2200 in my youth. I make tons of mistakes, but at the same time hardly a week goes by when somebody doesn't accuse me of using a computer. In other words, they don't see the mistakes. But I know they're there and to players better than I they are obvious mistakes. But almost none of them are "2 pawn +" blunders.
I've made a habit of skipping every rating that is the maximum and every rating that is the minimum of the allowed scope. Somewhere in the 2-to-4-star gamut is the truth of the matter.
I cashed out, paid my Dad back his $20 and kept the remainder. Never played again... have no desire to.
You're fortunate you don't have whatever it is that gives people a thrill from gambling. For those people, the worst thing that could happen is to win the first time. It ruins lives. I've seen it.
if they sell 245 million tickets, an average of 1.4 people will win.) And you have to split the winnings with them. So in fact your expected return is NEVER positive.
If one just *has* to play the lottery, play only numbers above 31. That will avoid all the birthday numbers, so the chances of splitting go down. There, that's my only lottery strategy. For free!
Oh yeah, and don't make a special trip to play. Adding in the risk of that trip ruins everything. OK, that's two strategies. Still free!
It makes you wounder why we pay attention to any study. Seems like most studies usually have contradictory results and then are summarily reversed years later.
Typically the early studies are observational. They find a correlation. Scientifically that should be a starting point, but instead people jump to a conclusion.
I could see people starting to mine Bitcoin as well as other shitcoins a whole lot in Greece should this come into effect.
Typically the way it's done is to still run the meter, but up to a certain threshold it's very cheap (or free in this case). It works well. Where I live, many people's electric bill is just a few dollars per month, while mine is a bit more than $100 because I run an air conditioner and several computers.
Except most retirees take more out of SS than they ever paid in...
Over a lifetime interest is earned and the absolute value of the money decreases. If you didn't get "more" out than you put in it would be terrible thing.
Not when he first started wondering about it. And I'm sure he hasn't been wondering about it constantly. Pre-internet, that sort of thing happened all the time. The usual answer was something like "I'll ask Uncle Joe next time I see him. He knows things like that."
Slashdot Mirror
You are confusing the medium with the message. That's how you end up with crappy greeting cards.
You need one of those ceiling projector clocks. I've had one for years and it's the nuts. Just look at the ceiling to see the time.
Almost definitely? You know if you're that sure you could make enough money to retire by buying oil futures. It's not as predicable as you make it out to be.
You have to understand. Brad is old and forgets things. You can tell by his user ID. So to him, these jokes aren't redundant, it's like they're bran....hang on, what were we talking about?
If he were perhaps they wouldn't have had to show the other evidence to make the case.
It may give financial incentive, but "cause" is not the right word.
Why would that be piracy?
So your strategy is to buy things that are going to go up in price? That's a really good one. Let me write that down.
Anybody can look back and see what they should have done. That's not a difficult skill to master. The hard part is doing it going forward. That's really hard.
<Cue the anecdotes from people who bought Uber early. That's not data.>
The only thing it shows is that in 2008 they filed for a patent. Every company doing any R&D does the same thing all the time. Anything it "shows" beyond that comes from you.
I think the big problem is that a "mistake" is being defined so crudely. I'll bet players make about the same number of mistakes no matter how good they are, but what they actually qualify as a mistake gets smaller and smaller.
It's certainly true for me. I play at about a 1900 level now and was 2200 in my youth. I make tons of mistakes, but at the same time hardly a week goes by when somebody doesn't accuse me of using a computer. In other words, they don't see the mistakes. But I know they're there and to players better than I they are obvious mistakes. But almost none of them are "2 pawn +" blunders.
They sue the widow, of course.
This post should be moderated +3, Insightful.
You went from premise to conclusion to anger to wild accusation in consecutive sentences. Impressive.
Which is probably why the story "leaked", so that they know they're serious.
That's for sure. The whole "Eat lots of grains and avoid fat" nonsense killed more people than did faulty pharmaceuticals.
I thought it meant Detroit.
You're fortunate you don't have whatever it is that gives people a thrill from gambling. For those people, the worst thing that could happen is to win the first time. It ruins lives. I've seen it.
If one just *has* to play the lottery, play only numbers above 31. That will avoid all the birthday numbers, so the chances of splitting go down. There, that's my only lottery strategy. For free!
Oh yeah, and don't make a special trip to play. Adding in the risk of that trip ruins everything. OK, that's two strategies. Still free!
I'm guessing the chances of getting hit by a bus on the way to get that ticket are greater than the chances of winning. Did he factor that in?
Typically the early studies are observational. They find a correlation. Scientifically that should be a starting point, but instead people jump to a conclusion.
Typically the way it's done is to still run the meter, but up to a certain threshold it's very cheap (or free in this case). It works well. Where I live, many people's electric bill is just a few dollars per month, while mine is a bit more than $100 because I run an air conditioner and several computers.
Over a lifetime interest is earned and the absolute value of the money decreases. If you didn't get "more" out than you put in it would be terrible thing.
Not when he first started wondering about it. And I'm sure he hasn't been wondering about it constantly. Pre-internet, that sort of thing happened all the time. The usual answer was something like "I'll ask Uncle Joe next time I see him. He knows things like that."
*Nobody* expects to have a heart attack and need to use a defibrillator!
It's not being taken to extend life, it's being taken in the hope that it makes the person feel younger and stronger.