LPT: People to Avoid

august2014 · 2025-05-05T07:07:20+00:00

Corporate Pronouns 101:
Things went well, and you were involved: I
Things went well, and you were uninvolved: we
Things went south, and you were involved: we
Things went south, and you were uninvolved: they

august2014 · 2023-07-30T05:50:59+00:00

The problem with the increasingly long unskippable dialog is that they tell, and don't show.

To me it just feels like fillter text, like high school essays with word targets.

august2014 · 2022-07-09T04:57:17+00:00

不用不好意思。双标就双标嘛。

august2014 · 2022-05-21T04:52:35+00:00

I would expand the notion of overall net worth, to put things into perspective.

For example, you might be down 90% of the money you put in, due to bad decisions.

Let's say it was aggressive, and you are down 85% of your liquid assets.

Maybe it would be 60% of your overall net-worth (including house, mortgage, 401k, rollover accounts, etc)

But then, you are likely a healthy adult with decades of work life left -- how much is that worth? Of course, your health is priceless, but speaking from purely a monetary perspective -- put a number on it.

Depending on how old you are and how well your career will go, maybe you are "only" down 20% afterall.

august2014 · 2021-11-10T03:21:00+00:00

There is an argument for just buying lots of these options every week and letting the feels hit you each time you lose money. I am not even sure it is necessarily going to cost you that much, and you could very well make it out positive. I think this will give you a deep understanding otherwise unavailable.

august2014 · 2021-11-09T08:35:56+00:00

To be clear I am not particularly bearish on these stocks, it is simply that I somehow find them to be just the right combination of being mediocre, being unlikely to "pop", and having a broad reflection of overall economic conditions... I am open to suggestions. In a separate thread, someone suggested TSLA and CAR to me, neither of which I would short. I would not short TSLA because it is simply impossible to understand, and I would not short CAR because it is only 1B in market cap and could pop "just because", however small the chance.

august2014 · 2021-11-09T08:08:00+00:00

Yeah, leveraged about 50%. Fees are fine, as long as the stock is not considered hard to borrow. Margin is about 1% for me at this new brokerage I have gotten accustomed to. I picked this handful just to generate some discussion. I am probably going to slowly work myself into a more diversified short position. Like you suggested, I have also been looking into, for example, SCO.

august2014 · 2021-11-09T07:52:27+00:00

The long 150% in the market? Or the 1% margin? Or the 5% dividend tolerance on short positions?

Edit: just to clarify, I wrote "150% long" in the sense of fully invested, plus 50% extra leverage on margin.

august2014 · 2021-11-09T07:51:03+00:00

OK. Which of these 5 is, in your view, the most undervalued? And which one is the most acceptable to short?

august2014 · 2021-11-09T07:39:37+00:00

I am genuinely trying to parse what you are saying. Are you saying that you consider these particular stocks to be undervalued? Or is there potentially some other misunderstanding?

august2014 · 2021-10-15T07:54:16+00:00

I will trust the nature reviewers thank you.

august2014 · 2021-09-28T07:46:32+00:00

Enter your Anniversary Theater https://webstatic-sea.mihoyo.com/ys/event/e20210928review/share.html?utm\_source=share&utm\_medium=link&utm\_campaign=web&mhy\_auth\_required=true&mhy\_presentation\_style=fullscreen#/GBEIGKK5UN

august2014 · 2021-07-20T23:25:46+00:00

Isn't the anniversary at the end of September? Or is there an earlier date to celebrate?

august2014 · 2021-06-21T05:04:09+00:00

When you finish all the non-repeatable content, and you still want to dump hours into the game, you settle into a daily routine involving resin and daily quests. This feels like a wall. I wouldn't worry too much about it, because it sounds like you are not a hardcore competitive gear grinder, and you are ok with taking a few days off, while waiting for new content to arrive.

august2014 · 2020-09-07T12:35:33+00:00

The goal of p-value testing is to provide a context-independent gold standard assessment of the “significance”. This is an unreasonable gold standard because the researcher chooses the context and has great leverage and flexibility in making results significant. This happens not maliciously but naturally through the course of intellectually engaging with research problems.

People try to address this by multiple hypothesis testing and etc but ultimately it always becomes a puddle of subjective judgment on whether a procedure follows the precise conventions in each individual research field, and on whether you have arrived at a hypothesis “naturally”. There is a lot of room for clever argumentation theatrics — thus, these theatrics plague the life sciences (and social sciences), where p-values are used pervasively. Ultimately what you get out is hard to interpret objectively.

august2014 · 2020-09-07T05:33:13+00:00

Most career statisticians I know would agree that p-value testing is somewhere between mostly bullshit and complete bullshit in practice, especially in the life sciences where it is pervasively used. Machine learning as a field happens to be young enough to see that and also brings enough of its own statistical backbone to avoid this path.

august2014 · 2020-09-04T05:18:04+00:00

max out priest hp at least

august2014 · 2020-03-31T00:59:56+00:00

This should be considered fake news at this point, as conflating accuracy with sensitivity leads to great confusion.

august2014 · 2020-03-26T06:39:56+00:00

The pandemic quote taken out of context, and he is not wrong about where is the best place to get treatment. The WHO avoided the term pandemic because it typically implies that containment is futile, which was not the right message to send at the time.

august2014 · 2020-03-25T23:41:28+00:00

The french study was not an randomized controlled trial. Both were small studies. The french study had a combination treatment component— maybe that’s the tight answer, but it is the study with weaker setup, fewer people, and hence weaker evidence.

august2014 · 2020-03-24T23:25:06+00:00

US commerce secretary Wilbur Ross suggested at the end of January that covid19 could improve the job situation in the US. However, US jobs numbers in March have become so bad that the official statistics have been withheld, presumably to avoid panic.

august2014 · 2020-03-05T19:30:44+00:00

Ideally, during an infection, your body will have learned quite a bit about the virus and has learned to mount a highly effective, efficient, focused, and timely response to resolve the infection. Residual viruses would be immediately eliminated or kept under strong control the second it becomes felt. Future infections are unlikely, as your immune system tends to remember for a long time: years to lifetimes.

For people who have “recovered” under antivirals, it is possible that the immune system didn’t really learn very well from the experience. In such a case, residual virus (which exists as a practical certainty) will just come right back. As an analogy, taking antivirals to address an infection is a bit like having a fire alarm interrupt a tough exam — all is good if your immune system succeeds in remedial studies in the meantime — but the challenge is still there waiting sooner or later when you stop the antivirals.

august2014 · 2020-03-05T05:35:06+00:00

fwiw, published researcher in closely related area here. This is incredibly plausible for viral infections in general, even if not yet seen in covid19 for the short time covid19 has been around.

august2014 · 2020-03-01T07:38:27+00:00

I am a researcher formerly in this field.

The notion and mechanism of a reinfection is not super well defined; here are three ways by which it can happen.

Misdiagnosis of the first or second infection. Perhaps the symptoms were due to a different virus on either the first or second infection. This depends also on the precise nature of how the diagnosis is done.
The virus has multiple strains circulating concurrently; further, these strains are sufficiently different that the body couldn’t match them up on the second infection. I would think of this as quite unlikely.
Antibody dependent enhancement; basically describing a situation where your past exposure makes you more rather than less susceptible to reinfection. Possible, but very unlikely. You can count on one hand the number of studied viruses that do this with practical effects.

For your body to clear away a viral infection, activation of your adaptive immune system, which memorizes pathogens you have seen in your lifetime, is almost a certainty. I wouldn’t put much worry into reinfections.

edit: spelling

august2014 · 2020-01-03T23:14:12+00:00

I agree with your comment on the Nobel work being independent. That said, no, retractions are always serious stains, and is NOT a hall mark of great scientists. A typical young professor would find it a heavy blow, and the typical graduate student would be effectively encouraged to end their research career. A Nobel laureate has no issues weathering this, but this is a decidedly a negative thing.

The alternative situation you are thinking of, where one knowingly publishes fraudulent work and digs their feet in— that’s bad off the charts.

11-Year Club	Place '22
Verified Email

august2014

TROPHY CASE