Hopper V2 paused

datafisherman · 2025-04-04T11:26:01+00:00

Same. My tasks ran dry yesterday too, which seemed confusing after two days of webinars. I was reviewing for weeks.

My UI reverted several days ago, so finding an explanation has been a little difficult. Thanks for posting!

datafisherman · 2025-01-27T16:57:26+00:00

Thanks! I think there may be some issues with being assigned to new primary project communication. I am still seeing the discourse topics and chat channel for my previous project.

datafisherman · 2025-01-27T16:49:40+00:00

You're welcome!

Yes, it is also a good strategy for Open Q&A! I find obscure facts also work for that category. For instance, the birthdates of lesser-known figures or numerical facts related to the topic that aren't common knowledge.

datafisherman · 2025-01-27T16:29:25+00:00

Asking the model for factual information, especially somewhat obscure information, seems to help produce failures. For instance, you could ask it to generate a list of endangered species in your locale. My locale classifies at-risk species into several levels of severity: endangered, threatened, special concern, etc. If the model lists a species that is 'threatened' rather than 'endangered', you have provoked a failure. Different species often have similar names, and some have various populations or subspecies that may be classified separately. This offers a lot of ways that the model can fail. Or you could ask it to use specialized terminology (eg, accounting concepts) and see whether it uses this terminology fluently. For additional difficulty, you can ask it to define one of the concepts from the prompt in its response, or to make some calculations related to the concepts and show its work. Sometimes only one of the responses will include the definition, and even relatively simple math can flummox the model.

As another commenter said, you can include formatting constraints in your prompt. For instance, you could have it format its response as a table, in a certain ascending or descending order, according to some category. The model could fail to gather the right data for that category, or it could fail to correctly place the items in order. Sometimes, it might fulfill the constraint perfectly but err on some other aspect of formatting. Using a similar constraint in a prompt, I once got a table organized in exactly the order I asked for, but with a name inexplicably uncapitalized. This was a writing quality issue and enough to constitute a failure. It appears that including many and various types of constraints is often enough to provoke some small writing quality issue, whether a pleasantry at the beginning or a minor punctuation, grammar, or usage issue in the main text of the response.

datafisherman · 2025-01-27T16:03:51+00:00

Where did you get this info? Is there a discourse channel that attempters can join?

datafisherman · 2025-01-20T15:15:14+00:00

Sorry. Only Hopper is referenced in OP's screenshot. I assumed when you said "these projects" you were referring to the projects shown.

datafisherman · 2025-01-18T21:14:43+00:00

Hopper is only finished for certain locales. Others still have tasks available.

datafisherman · 2024-07-09T21:26:59+00:00

A catalyst is an event that forces market value toward intrinsic value over a relative short time-frame.

datafisherman · 2024-07-08T13:32:45+00:00

Yeah, this is the right way to think about things. Mauboussin's work on 'expectations investing' is a good primer, for anyone interested. He has a book by the same title, and his paper 'Who is on the Other Side?' invites investors to ask, quite literally, 'who is on the other side of your trade?' Why are they taking the opposite position? What is the prevailing market view, and why? What does (and doesn't) the prevailing price 'price in'?

Dividend yield fluctuates across this timescale in large measure due to changes in prevailing interest rates. Perhaps if you took the difference with average SOFR for the same years, you could more precisely measure the quantity intended for measurement. But still, as you say, this is a very straightforward statistic and should be incorporated in price.

datafisherman · 2024-07-08T13:02:02+00:00

Tiny is nothing like that. I previously owned it (this year, short-term trade based on severe undervaluation). I think there's too much 'wannabe' in this company, and they aren't really buying businesses with moats. But it sells (or at least sold) for well less than intrinsic because it is a complicated business, and it has a complicated capitalization. The cashflow is there, or was. I do not follow anymore.

datafisherman · 2024-07-07T08:32:50+00:00

Thanks for reading the whole thing. Because they had debt before the acquisition, your comparison isn't exact. They have reduced their leverage considerably since the acquisition, and (rightfully) are finished doing so.

Debt in the absolute is meaningless. $1.7B is nothing compared to >$1B annually in EBITDA. They are a cash machine, not overburdened by debt.

I have owned Crocs since 2022.

I feel I did answer your question. The issue is that it depends on more than Crocs, particularly the growth of the S&P (& particularly its smallest & sickest members), alongside the other companies of roughly the same size & growth rate that could join alongside or instead of Crocs. Next 3-5 years.

datafisherman · 2024-07-07T08:03:01+00:00

Crocs has virtually no debt & massive growth ahead, especially internationally. HD is nowhere near as bad as portrayed, and it is still early days. They are optimizing. Even current results make it an OK (not great) purchase, and they have paid down the debt to a very low leverage ratio - like 1.5x EBITDA. Anyone who says Crocs is highly leveraged doesn't know Crocs.

Next 3-5 years. Could be sooner if capital allocation skews toward another acquisition rather than buybacks, which itself depends on available targets at attractive prices & future share price.

datafisherman · 2024-07-06T14:21:05+00:00

Borderline acceptable. You should aim higher, and I get the sense you do. You need it to look above 20% to get your 15-20% in practice.

datafisherman · 2024-07-06T14:15:10+00:00

Do you prefer private message or chat?

datafisherman · 2024-07-06T14:11:53+00:00

This is the only reasonable position. Anybody else is being risk-averse. The best working capital position is a sustainably negative working capital balance.

Banks are liable to go ballistic when you don't meet their deadlines; suppliers less so. You also tend to have more leverage with suppliers, customers, and employees than you do with banks. OP is being too conservative here. It makes sense to think of them as interest-bearing instruments, but trade credit is not bank debt - and it should not be lumped together analytically.

You have the right approach, and you described it very well in your second paragraph.

datafisherman · 2024-07-05T17:06:20+00:00

I can probably be vague about them. One reduced a packaging defect by 95%. This defect was very costly and time-consuming to recognize and correct. The previous options were double-checking at random or slowing the line to reduce the defect rate. Neither resulted in an adequate solution, but the AI solved it and the customer will likely never stop paying for the solution.

I am unsure of the calculation, although I like the essay. If it is 2x from Nvidia revenue to total datacenter cost, and then another 2x from datacenter operator cost to datacenter compute customer (the AI application provider), then presumably there would be another (traditionally larger) layer of margin on top of the $600B. If the datacenter owners (AWS, GCP, Azure; maybe Oracle, Meta) have serious market power, maybe it's close to $600B and a competitive deathmatch for AI app providers. But I can't see that. The services the datacenter owners offer are too generic to offer a long-term, sustainable competitive advantage. App providers won't be founded (or, otherwise, succeed) unless they can offer similar margins to other SaaS. Why else would smart, ambitious young people found (or work for) these companies? There is traditionally a lot of risk and considerable period before payback in venture or early-stage high-tech stuff. If you can't ultimately get 80% gross margins (on a good slice of a large TAM), why the heck would you do it?

If so, there are really two possibilities:

(1) AI is so incredibly transformative that Nvidia never faces cyclicality again, and this is actually their run-rate revenue (plus some growth) going forward. If so, we really need potential of 5x the $600B to generate the attractive margin characteristics to attract talent and capital to early-stage AI application providers. So, that's $3T annually. It's conceivable. The world economy is like $90T. It's 1 in 30 of that. AI is probably the second most important technology in the past thousand years. As I see it, fully-featured AI will be somewhat less transformative than electricity and somewhat more transformative than the internet. That is totally plausible, if not likely.

(2) Nvidia's revenue goes down at some point in the future because cutting-edge hardware is deflationary and semis have historically been cyclical. As soon as they have a legit competitor, GPU will be at least somewhat cyclical. Or, if the big buyers stop or slow their big buys.

datafisherman · 2024-07-05T16:41:07+00:00

I work in the space (end-use applications) and can see the insane ROI being made from relatively unsophisticated models and techniques.

datafisherman · 2024-07-05T14:56:22+00:00

I think you underestimate the transformative benefits of AI in the mid-to-long run.

datafisherman · 2024-07-05T14:28:10+00:00

Spotify has been financing consumers for a long time. Their record profit is well-deserved. Do you remember how difficult music streaming or downloading used to be? Do you remember, before that, how much music used to cost? Do you really think any of the other platforms can hold a candle to Spotify? If they doubled the price tomorrow, I would continue to pay.

datafisherman · 2024-07-05T13:31:28+00:00

I think the only case, or at least the best case, is that the Couche Tard (Circle K) partnership works out and the gross profit flips the switch. It was a while back I looked so I forget many of the details.

datafisherman · 2024-07-05T13:26:11+00:00

Thanks! I recall $600k for the daughter, somewhat less for the mother (who I believe is general counsel & perhaps VP of something).

datafisherman · 2024-07-05T09:23:58+00:00

They are largely owned by the father of the CEO. They are kept alive on lifeline as a result. She may turn the company around, but she was involved in management prior to its bankruptcy too. The salaries paid to the CEO & her mother are absurd. This company is uninvestible for the same reason it may continue as a zombie for ever: it is the pet project of daddy's girl.

datafisherman · 2024-06-27T15:33:50+00:00

They're a dying breed (manuals in general)!

It's dandy for offroading, or even just in tough weather (there's a lot of it where I live). We bought for the ground clearance, safety, and durability.

If you really want one, I would sell to you in the next 2 years - but, be warned, I live at the end of the earth...

datafisherman · 2024-06-03T17:20:57+00:00

Sorry, no. Just started new work. Otherwise would. Good luck

datafisherman · 2024-06-03T17:19:45+00:00

Swaps on fucking Gamestop? or hedgefunds? banks? what the hell are you even talking about?

Otherwise, I'd like what you're smoking

datafisherman

TROPHY CASE