I am probably the most anti-Trump person out there and there is pretty stiff competition. But I have no idea how you could blame the current administration for H1-B related issues. It's one area where the current administration has actually identified a problem and proposed a reasonable solution. H1-Bs go to those willing to pay the highest salaries. I can't believe this hasn't been proposed before.
No, the ideal scenario is that the only things that are crimes are those that harm others. And your chances of getting away with those ought to be exactly zero. The goal should be to maximize freedom. The reason that we don't (and shouldn't) target zero crime is that crime prevention techniques that we have infringe on freedoms. It doesn't make sense to use a technique that destroys more freedom than it creates. The world is advancing. At some point we may be able to eliminate more crime with lower cost to freedom in which case we should. I have no idea what a technology that prevented all crime without taking away freedoms from innocent people would look like. But should such a thing be discovered, it ought be deployed. And somebody's "freedom to maybe get away with a crime" should not be a factor in the decision.
Even if she hired a law firm, that doesn't really change anything. That law firm will have a conflict of interest in wanting to meet their client's needs. Turn them all over to the investigators and deal with the consequences and don't mix work/personal email again. Even when separate email accounts are used it's often hard to decide where the official business ends and the personal stuff begins. But when using separate email you get to insert your opinion at the time of the communication. If you fail to do that, you don't get to decide in hindsight. Hillary handled this in the worst way possible and it's one of many things that may have cost her an election despite having the more popular policy platform and that's a shame.
This seems to be a better range than current batteries, so if it's higher energy density and has a wider operating temperature range, seems to be a win all around. Nobody has talked of weight so these may be heavy batteries, but for a mobile phone who cares. For an electric car where the batteries are already the heaviest component, that may matter.
In that situation this battery would do better than current offerings so I'm not sure what we're sneering at here. Also if you can really get better energy density, it may be possible to install a small heater and some insulation to maintain the battery temperature and still have higher power density than today's offerings.
When a business is a growth company, revenue valuations are reasonable. If the plan is to use all of the profits to grow the company, the profit will always be zero. This is a reasonable strategy. It certainly worked for Amazon. When buying zero-profit companies, you have to decide whether they are actually going to turn into a profitable business. I don't see much hope for SNAP.
This is the "greater fool" method of investing. It's also high-risk because you are holding a valueless asset. Always scared me away but others may have the stomach for it.
I think that the period for options listing is five trading days not sixty. So it may be possible to buy puts well before the lockup-period ends. But I agree with you generally. Short-positions are near impossible for retail investors even on non-IPO shares.
http://www.theoptionsguide.com...
It looks like the company pushed pretty hard for a lock-up period for IPO investors. Whenever a company goes public, most pre-IPO shareholders are subject to a lockup period. http://fortune.com/2017/02/28/... So the number of shares available for trading is much lower than the actual float. Also many (if not all) book-runners require their buyers to hold for 60 days. So there just aren't very many shares to trade after an IPO. The price goes up for a paper-gain but doesn't represent a consensus valuation.
http://fortune.com/2017/02/28/...
This doesn't bother me at all. Here in Florida, we have "government in the sunshine" laws. We don't have to hack politicians email accounts to see what is going on. The rest of the country ought to adopt the same way of governing. Then you could just have blank passwords.
I like Hillary but I think herein lies the problem. She didn't turn them all over. She had her own people go through and decide which ones were personal. Sorry once you mix work and personal emails this way, you have to turn over the whole trove. Presumably she didn't want to do that because there may have been embarrassing personal things. I'm sure my personal email would get me raked over the coals. But I don't mix work email with personal. It was a terrible decision to mix the two emails. That part is a bigger problem than the fact that it was a private server.
It's hard to say that using a non-approved email system qualifies as stupid. I have customers who forward all of their work email to their gmail accounts. I point out to them all of the trouble that it has caused Hillary and other politicians and they just shrug. There's clearly some email-specific cognitive dissonance in the world.
Mere mortals can buy IPO shares and I've been offered them in the past. There are certain requirements. You usually have to have a minimum asset base of $250k-500k as well as recent trading experience. Sometimes you can meet some other qualification in order to be considered an experienced investor and your brokerage will offer you the option to buy IPO shares. Usually if you sell the IPO shares within 60 days you won't get offered to buy them again. That's part of the reason they tend to go up initially. There are a lot of "locked up" investors who can't sell, so the number of shares actually available for trading is much smaller than the float.
From what I can tell, there are no SNAP puts trading yet. I've often looked at buying puts on companies but rarely ever actually purchased. You usually can't buy puts more than six months in the future and you will pay dearly for them. Often the stock goes down but you still lose because it doesn't go down enough to cover the premium you pay for the put. You can use some long-term rolling strategies but these are very high risk. And the company will work against you. They will release abysmal earnings that validate your hypothesis right after the market closes. But then they'll go on a 16 hour PR blitz to talk about their growth potential. So unless you can acquire the shares after hours and exercise your puts (takes a lot of capital), by the time the market opens, your profit may be gone. Identifying bad companies is not that hard. But buying puts is, because you need somebody on the other side. Actually shorting the stock is cheaper but then you have unlimited risk. To mitigate that you'll have to buy calls which will then eat up a chunk of your profits. And with shorting, time is not on your side. In a long position, patience can win out.
If you have a 5 or 7 year introductory rate on the ARM and 20% down it would take a 30% drop in prices to prevent refinancing. The biggest hurdle to refinancing won't be a drop in the price of the asset as much as the collateral damage of an economy in a tailspin.
Most ARMs are tied to the 10 year US treasury note + a profit for the issuer. So usually 10 year note rate + 2% after the introductory period. If you aren't extending yourself buying a house, a seven year ARM makes a lot of sense. At the end of the introductory period, you take a 15 year fixed rate and will have a much lower average interest rate than the 30 year fixed unless rates go through the roof. Although the latter scenario only happens in very fast growing economies.
Yes, if the mortgagor loses their job and has to sell the house, they are way better off than if they had paid for 30 years of fixed rate only to own the house for a decade or so.
Wireless everything does sound appealing. Not only could the device be waterproof, but way less possibility for physical damage when inserting / removing connectors. (I have a five year old and I've learned all kinds of new ways to break things). I guess Apple has come a long way from the "No wireless, less space than a nomad" days!
This isn't unique to Chinese. I knew a native Italian speaker whose English was otherwise quite good but he would always ask one to "Open the light." And he definitely didn't know any Chinese.
I don't think that this is a fair statement. I remember back in the pre-wifi days, I was at a meeting and our customer tripped over an Ethernet cable and broke multiple of our laptops. All we could do was graciously accept the apology. Even if you are careful, when you have cables strewn about, somebody else may damage your equipment.
Agreed. General recommendations are 5-10 years salary to be spent on a house. So at $150k/year, he should spend no more than $1.5 million. Better to try to find something for a million dollars. Should be able to find something in that range. Assuming a $1 million mortgage at 4%, the government will subsidize that to the tune of about $13k/year which is more than some people make.
Slashdot Mirror
I am probably the most anti-Trump person out there and there is pretty stiff competition. But I have no idea how you could blame the current administration for H1-B related issues. It's one area where the current administration has actually identified a problem and proposed a reasonable solution. H1-Bs go to those willing to pay the highest salaries. I can't believe this hasn't been proposed before.
I wish I hadn't commented so that I could mod parent up.
No, the ideal scenario is that the only things that are crimes are those that harm others. And your chances of getting away with those ought to be exactly zero. The goal should be to maximize freedom. The reason that we don't (and shouldn't) target zero crime is that crime prevention techniques that we have infringe on freedoms. It doesn't make sense to use a technique that destroys more freedom than it creates. The world is advancing. At some point we may be able to eliminate more crime with lower cost to freedom in which case we should. I have no idea what a technology that prevented all crime without taking away freedoms from innocent people would look like. But should such a thing be discovered, it ought be deployed. And somebody's "freedom to maybe get away with a crime" should not be a factor in the decision.
Even if she hired a law firm, that doesn't really change anything. That law firm will have a conflict of interest in wanting to meet their client's needs. Turn them all over to the investigators and deal with the consequences and don't mix work/personal email again. Even when separate email accounts are used it's often hard to decide where the official business ends and the personal stuff begins. But when using separate email you get to insert your opinion at the time of the communication. If you fail to do that, you don't get to decide in hindsight. Hillary handled this in the worst way possible and it's one of many things that may have cost her an election despite having the more popular policy platform and that's a shame.
This seems to be a better range than current batteries, so if it's higher energy density and has a wider operating temperature range, seems to be a win all around. Nobody has talked of weight so these may be heavy batteries, but for a mobile phone who cares. For an electric car where the batteries are already the heaviest component, that may matter.
In that situation this battery would do better than current offerings so I'm not sure what we're sneering at here. Also if you can really get better energy density, it may be possible to install a small heater and some insulation to maintain the battery temperature and still have higher power density than today's offerings.
When a business is a growth company, revenue valuations are reasonable. If the plan is to use all of the profits to grow the company, the profit will always be zero. This is a reasonable strategy. It certainly worked for Amazon. When buying zero-profit companies, you have to decide whether they are actually going to turn into a profitable business. I don't see much hope for SNAP.
This is the "greater fool" method of investing. It's also high-risk because you are holding a valueless asset. Always scared me away but others may have the stomach for it.
I think that the period for options listing is five trading days not sixty. So it may be possible to buy puts well before the lockup-period ends. But I agree with you generally. Short-positions are near impossible for retail investors even on non-IPO shares. http://www.theoptionsguide.com...
It looks like the company pushed pretty hard for a lock-up period for IPO investors. Whenever a company goes public, most pre-IPO shareholders are subject to a lockup period. http://fortune.com/2017/02/28/... So the number of shares available for trading is much lower than the actual float. Also many (if not all) book-runners require their buyers to hold for 60 days. So there just aren't very many shares to trade after an IPO. The price goes up for a paper-gain but doesn't represent a consensus valuation. http://fortune.com/2017/02/28/...
This doesn't bother me at all. Here in Florida, we have "government in the sunshine" laws. We don't have to hack politicians email accounts to see what is going on. The rest of the country ought to adopt the same way of governing. Then you could just have blank passwords.
I like Hillary but I think herein lies the problem. She didn't turn them all over. She had her own people go through and decide which ones were personal. Sorry once you mix work and personal emails this way, you have to turn over the whole trove. Presumably she didn't want to do that because there may have been embarrassing personal things. I'm sure my personal email would get me raked over the coals. But I don't mix work email with personal. It was a terrible decision to mix the two emails. That part is a bigger problem than the fact that it was a private server.
It's hard to say that using a non-approved email system qualifies as stupid. I have customers who forward all of their work email to their gmail accounts. I point out to them all of the trouble that it has caused Hillary and other politicians and they just shrug. There's clearly some email-specific cognitive dissonance in the world.
Mere mortals can buy IPO shares and I've been offered them in the past. There are certain requirements. You usually have to have a minimum asset base of $250k-500k as well as recent trading experience. Sometimes you can meet some other qualification in order to be considered an experienced investor and your brokerage will offer you the option to buy IPO shares. Usually if you sell the IPO shares within 60 days you won't get offered to buy them again. That's part of the reason they tend to go up initially. There are a lot of "locked up" investors who can't sell, so the number of shares actually available for trading is much smaller than the float.
SNAP is not in any indices
From what I can tell, there are no SNAP puts trading yet. I've often looked at buying puts on companies but rarely ever actually purchased. You usually can't buy puts more than six months in the future and you will pay dearly for them. Often the stock goes down but you still lose because it doesn't go down enough to cover the premium you pay for the put. You can use some long-term rolling strategies but these are very high risk. And the company will work against you. They will release abysmal earnings that validate your hypothesis right after the market closes. But then they'll go on a 16 hour PR blitz to talk about their growth potential. So unless you can acquire the shares after hours and exercise your puts (takes a lot of capital), by the time the market opens, your profit may be gone. Identifying bad companies is not that hard. But buying puts is, because you need somebody on the other side. Actually shorting the stock is cheaper but then you have unlimited risk. To mitigate that you'll have to buy calls which will then eat up a chunk of your profits. And with shorting, time is not on your side. In a long position, patience can win out.
If you bought IP shares at $16 and you sell them today for $25, that's a pretty good return.
If you have a 5 or 7 year introductory rate on the ARM and 20% down it would take a 30% drop in prices to prevent refinancing. The biggest hurdle to refinancing won't be a drop in the price of the asset as much as the collateral damage of an economy in a tailspin.
Most ARMs are tied to the 10 year US treasury note + a profit for the issuer. So usually 10 year note rate + 2% after the introductory period. If you aren't extending yourself buying a house, a seven year ARM makes a lot of sense. At the end of the introductory period, you take a 15 year fixed rate and will have a much lower average interest rate than the 30 year fixed unless rates go through the roof. Although the latter scenario only happens in very fast growing economies.
Yes, if the mortgagor loses their job and has to sell the house, they are way better off than if they had paid for 30 years of fixed rate only to own the house for a decade or so.
Wireless everything does sound appealing. Not only could the device be waterproof, but way less possibility for physical damage when inserting / removing connectors. (I have a five year old and I've learned all kinds of new ways to break things). I guess Apple has come a long way from the "No wireless, less space than a nomad" days!
USB keyboards can support full rollover in HID "report protocol". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
This isn't unique to Chinese. I knew a native Italian speaker whose English was otherwise quite good but he would always ask one to "Open the light." And he definitely didn't know any Chinese.
I don't think that this is a fair statement. I remember back in the pre-wifi days, I was at a meeting and our customer tripped over an Ethernet cable and broke multiple of our laptops. All we could do was graciously accept the apology. Even if you are careful, when you have cables strewn about, somebody else may damage your equipment.
Agreed. General recommendations are 5-10 years salary to be spent on a house. So at $150k/year, he should spend no more than $1.5 million. Better to try to find something for a million dollars. Should be able to find something in that range. Assuming a $1 million mortgage at 4%, the government will subsidize that to the tune of about $13k/year which is more than some people make.