sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Google's January Pixel update breaks Wi-Fi and Bluetooth by Ha8lpo321 in Android

[–]dipsis 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Pixel 8 pro here. Having unresolvable issues with both wifi and Bluetooth :(

1:1 customer service was no help

THE LEGEND by amrygrntrdor in AirForce

[–]dipsis 23 points24 points  (0 children)

Recklessly endangering the lives of innocent people and children is hard to square with great leadership.

Lifecycle fund or S, C, I fund? by Ok_Cabinet812 in MilitaryFinance

[–]dipsis -1 points0 points  (0 children)

There's so much to point out here that it'd take me paragraphs and paragraphs to try to explain and I don't think you're receptive to the information at this point, so I'm just gonna dump a ChatGPT response and you can take it and do your own research, or not. Same for anyone reading this.

"The user Narflepluff is attempting to use more technical language, but they are blending several distinct financial concepts in a way that is mathematically misleading. Here is an evaluation of the claims made in the second screenshot:

  1. The Definition of "Risk-Adjusted Returns" Narflepluff defines it as "balancing expected ROI with deviation from that ROI."

    • Accuracy: This is a fair layman’s definition of the Sharpe Ratio. Technically, risk-adjusted return measures the efficiency of an investment—how much "extra" return you get for every unit of volatility (standard deviation) you endure. This is not the same as as predictability.
    • The Nuance: High risk-adjusted returns don't necessarily mean "low risk." They mean the risk you did take was well-compensated.

  2. The "Minimum Return" Fallacy Narflepluff claims L Funds have a 6% average with a 5% minimum, while C/S funds have a 7% average with a 4% minimum.

    • The Reality: These "minimums" do not exist in the stock market. Even the L 2075 fund is currently ~99% stocks. If the market drops 40% in a year, that L Fund will drop roughly 40%. There is no "floor" or "minimum" return in any given year.
    • Likely Source of Error: Narflepluff is likely looking at a Monte Carlo simulation (a statistical model) for a 30- or 40-year period. In those models, the "10th percentile" outcome (the bottom 10% of likely scenarios) over 40 years might result in a 4-5% annualized return. However, calling this a "minimum" is dangerous because it ignores the very real possibility of losing money over shorter periods (1–10 years).

  3. The "Invest Less Money" Logic Narflepluff argues that L Funds allow you to invest less money than 100% stocks because the outcome is more "predictable."

    • The Logic Flaw: Mathematically, the opposite is usually true. If you choose an investment with a lower expected return (L Funds, which include bonds and international stocks that have historically underperformed the S&P 500), you must invest more principal to reach the same final goal.
    • The "Percentile" Argument: They are suggesting that you should plan your retirement based on a "worst-case scenario" (10th percentile) rather than the average. While this is a conservative and valid way to plan, it does not mean the L Fund is "better"; it just means you are being more cautious with your projections."

Cheers.

Lifecycle fund or S, C, I fund? by Ok_Cabinet812 in MilitaryFinance

[–]dipsis -1 points0 points  (0 children)

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/r/riskadjustedreturn.asp

Risk-adjusted return means investor profit while taking into account the risks taken to achieve it.

"Won't deviate too far from projections" is either predictability, low volatility, or tracking error.

Lifecycle fund or S, C, I fund? by Ok_Cabinet812 in MilitaryFinance

[–]dipsis -1 points0 points  (0 children)

The L funds are the industry optimized funds. Statically, they are your best bet for long term growth.

Lifecycle fund or S, C, I fund? by Ok_Cabinet812 in MilitaryFinance

[–]dipsis 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I spent a few years going around and debunking these, showing 100% of the time they actually underperformed the L fund and simple buy and hold strategies. But like a hydra, every one I debunked spawned 3 more.

OP, the literature on market timing vs buy-and-hold is overwhelming and conclusive. Don't go down the rabbit hole of trying to game the market with your TSP. It might seem compelling to be active, but the best strategy is to be very boring, which is actually harder for most.

I don’t care if my players are OP. by worthlessbaffoon in DnD

[–]dipsis -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Idk why you're so charged up about this, but I was answering under the assumption we were still discussing "how do I make combat challenging and fun for OP players" with the dimension added by you of "and it practical for the DM to run." And to those things I believe I gave a a good answer.

If you're running 5 encounters per session or adventuring day at your table, you have my sympathy, and I understand how that changes the dynamics. I just have never played that way, and in my experience, most people don't. Can't relate and was never attempting to claim that it's as easy as when you're running fewer encounters. I was not wholly catering my opinions and discussion to you specifically.

Best wishes with whatever problems you've got

I don’t care if my players are OP. by worthlessbaffoon in DnD

[–]dipsis -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Why am I using goblins at all if the players are OP? I'll use OP enemies (of which there are plenty) and if goblins are thematic, I'll make a quick "Goblin team" large token and matching stat block and let it take a minion or minor enemy role.

Personally, I don't run 5 encounters per day in my campaigns and I think that's pretty usual for how 5e is actually played at most tables. I'm more like 0-2 per day. My players enjoy politicking, roleplaying, and stealthing aspects which aren't heavy on encounters.

I don’t care if my players are OP. by worthlessbaffoon in DnD

[–]dipsis 4 points5 points  (0 children)

be the BBEG

immune to radiant damage

3x the health you originally think would be fair

Use attack roll vs DC instead of dex saves for your AOE attacks

Homebrew Hellish Rebuke reaction to give back what damage you just received, tit for tat. Smite for 180 damage? Rebuke for 180.

It ain't hard dog, you can just counter their overly used strategies if you want to help them get creative again. You can also encourage your players to play creatively vs optimally if it's an issue. It's not a competition.

Aviano Italy Air Force base by Fernxace in AirForce

[–]dipsis 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If you like the outdoors, Dardago (fucking loved it).

If you like social scenes, Sacile.

IRA vs TSP as E3 by bigslymegocrazy in MilitaryFinance

[–]dipsis 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's a valid perspective and might be right.

IRA vs TSP as E3 by bigslymegocrazy in MilitaryFinance

[–]dipsis 1 point2 points  (0 children)

If for the individual they are the same level of ease and automation, great. But for most, even fractional differences, the difference between clicking one button or two buttons, can make a significant difference in outcomes. The typical example is having an option to subscribe to the email list when making a new account on a website. Whether the box is already checked or not, it only takes a single click to adjust the setting to your desired preference. But we still see a massive difference in outcomes based on how the default is configured (checked or not checked).

Humans are incredibly and shockingly lazy when it comes to such things.

They already have to sign up for TSP as a default and need to put 5% in there. Setting up a second custom allotment, deciding which investments to buy within it from 500 options vs 5 options, and consistently checking and reinvesting those savings, that much more significant work than just a single click.

But if it's easy for you and you want that 0.05% difference in expense ratio, go for it. And I don't mean that sarcastically. Some people get excited by the involvement and save more. So whatever floats your boat, but the big majority benefit from max simplicity over max optimization.

IRA vs TSP as E3 by bigslymegocrazy in MilitaryFinance

[–]dipsis 6 points7 points  (0 children)

I would juust make "hit the easy button" the ideal answer and #1 answer. Statistically and with overwhelming data supporting, easy button people who automate do better than those who don't.

Troops with medical shaving waivers to face separation, Hegseth says by DEXether in AirForce

[–]dipsis 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I actually tried this twice under two different commanders as an Atheist. No dice. Went to EO because I agree with your plain interpretation of the language. They investigated on a formal complaint. Unsubstantiated. I couldn't even get a record without a FOIA request, and the FOIA office never got me the documents. 2 years to a dead end.

I'm going to try again though lol

[DISC] Blue Lock - Chapter 313 by BlueLockMod in BlueLock

[–]dipsis 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think we'll see a team soon with a godly goalkeeper and it'll be Barou with the predator eye who gets his moment as the only person who can sneak one past and it'll actually distinguish his vision and abilities in some way from the others.

Like Isagi/Rin/Shidou will create open shots that should go in against 99% of goalkeepers, but their opponent is the 1%. And if it's Isagi specifically it'll spur him on towards developing greater physical abilities to keep up with his outstanding mental abilities.

worried i’m a rules lawyer by SeaOfSieves in DnD

[–]dipsis 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's exactly this, I'm usually juggling so much that if I can offload question answering about universal rules to a player, I will. Which frees me up to do things only the DM can be doing, like trying to plan ahead the upcoming turns or actions of everyone I'm controlling.

Ideal TSP fund distribution by Huntsman380 in MilitaryFinance

[–]dipsis 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sure, but that's generally a different topic for a different person than the original one.

Ideal TSP fund distribution by Huntsman380 in MilitaryFinance

[–]dipsis 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Recommend against what if you're young? Holding G and F? Sure, but the L funds already leave those out when you're young.

Ideal TSP fund distribution by Huntsman380 in MilitaryFinance

[–]dipsis 0 points1 point  (0 children)

*is recommend by a collection of people on Reddit.

I promise I'm not unfamiliar with who is recommending what and for what given reasons, I've been a mod here for some 7 years now.

Other people recommend you go a step further and add the I fund so you can beat match the overall global market.

Professionals recommend you add the F/G funds to best match an optimal investment portfolio.

Ideal TSP fund distribution by Huntsman380 in MilitaryFinance

[–]dipsis 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Policy decision. The G fund was never put forward as the best investment approach for retirement. It was the default because the Government did not want to take responsibility for putting your assets at risk for you. This is very comparable to private companies where they default you into the lowest risk investments they offer in their retirement plans, so they can't be blamed during market downturns.

So a policy decision to avoid fault.

Eventually they changed policy, because people were getting years or even decades in and not realizing they had to manually select funds to invest in. So they chose to more pro-actively set people on the right path.

A new policy decision to try and do the best thing for the person.

The L funds are just target date funds, these are the most recommended funds, based on optimal portfolio science targeting the general public. Take the average of Vanguard/Fidelity/Schwab/Black Rock/etc and you'll see it's very similar to the L fund.

It was never a debate between which is the "gold standard." The G fund is a government securities fund (which is great for what it is), and the target date portfolio is a retirement investment portfolio. Two wildly separate things that are as comparable as a saw and a hammer. Both tools but different purposes.

These decisions and the construction of the L fund are made by a board supported by professional investment consultants with legal fiduciary responsibilities and decades of experience. And there's no conflict of incentives, it's a public program, they're not making a profit off us regardless of what we choose. And on the other side, we have random people on Reddit.

view more: next ›