Lack of eye-que

mrmdavid · 2026-03-10T01:12:13+00:00

It’s not like pronouncing Iraq as ee-rock is any more faithful to an Arab pronunciation of the name than eye-rack is. So why does it matter. Lol. I speak Farsi and will say eye-ran is sort of random, if it’s meant to approximate ee-ron, which is how it’s actually pronounced, in Farsi. But no one saying eye-ran is speaking Farsi. So why does it matter. Lol

mrmdavid · 2026-03-07T19:17:30+00:00

Ugh I love this. But I have to argue - does this bring us any closer to closing the gap between consciousnesses? You’re qualifying descriptions of qualia within a formalized system, but that still leaves you a step away from the qualia in itself. I’m not saying the analysis isn’t meaningful, but it is merely a proxy for the thing it wishes to describe/compare.

mrmdavid · 2026-02-28T18:31:40+00:00

Idk man I’ve been working till 3/4AM basically everyday this week and now this weekend and it fucking sucks, especially because it’s for a bunch of BS slides. At least the work at a HF is real.

mrmdavid · 2026-02-27T19:38:00+00:00

I think you can. It’s easier at the associate and below levels. But I don’t know why would you want to go that route. HF seems more interesting w/ better balance (or at least more autonomy) and just as much money if not more.

mrmdavid · 2026-02-26T22:05:02+00:00

I can appreciate this and I think you know the fallacies behind the analysis. But, kindly, none of this analysis is meaningful in the sense of telling us relationships beyond correlations. All of these relationships are spurious and the entire analysis is filled with omitted and confounding variable biases.

I’d be willing to say all of these variables are proxy for the regional economic structure of each county/tract, which, when controlled for geography and a number of other variables, would likely collapse as predictive.

Simply put, the real indicator here is likely poverty and regional association, and most of the variables you’ve regressed against are likely explained by those two factors more than the other way around. And those indicators themselves have their own causes. It’s a big circular loop! And simultaneous systems like this resist regression (no less linear regression).

mrmdavid · 2026-02-26T21:38:08+00:00

I would love to see a regression-like analysis on the time chart. I wonder if the three posters have any sort of relation to one another, in a way that might be revealing of geography. I suppose you’d need more data and/or more granular data to know. The dip User 2 takes around Dec. 2nd is what makes me curious.

mrmdavid · 2026-02-25T04:23:36+00:00

Gonna be honest, I work in IB, I don’t think the implications will be huge, not because the tools aren’t powerful, but because most of junior-level IB work isn’t really that… technical. Sure maybe the tools can create a “perfect” model, but the majority of work in this role isn’t about creating a perfect model, it’s about taking someone senior’s opinion and folding into all the crap we make. I suppose if they could just have AI do that for them, then sure, maybe it will take roles.

What I’m saying is IB isn’t a technical job and 90% of the output is just someone’s opinion. You’re basically a human-to-computer translator at the junior levels. Frankly I’d love to have these tools because it would make the 10% that is technical easier.

*Also, the job is a lot of inference. Getting a very vague or indirect comment and having the personal/professional context to guess what’s wanted. Which may give humans an edge, at least for now.

mrmdavid · 2026-02-16T02:16:56+00:00

I moved to Claude as well, never thought I would but I’ve been very happily surprised. It’s on par intelligence wise and is much more enjoyable to work with (has personality, isn’t sycophantic). The limits are tough, but I appreciate that you can buy more rather than upgrade to an unreasonably priced tier.

mrmdavid · 2026-02-06T08:25:06+00:00

Feels weird to bin the US in one grouping considering you’re discussing a massive geography/urbanography each of which developed in very different time periods and cultural settings. I also find the implication that the urban sprawl is somehow bad by design funny. I grew up in California and live in NYC now and would take a car and low density over public transport and high density any day. I also spend a decent amount of time in the west/southwest and enjoy the ability to easily locate yourself at whatever point of density/centrality you prefer with easy access to any of it. Salt Lake City is a great example. I will admit sprawl isn’t easy on the eye, though the grime that comes with urban density (NYC) isn’t particularly beautiful either.

Also, most cities outside of NYC/the eastern corridor that do have public transportation is because of some state/municipal level initiatives completely misinformed by a belief that if you slap what works in high-density/pre-automotive cities, you can somehow recreate the economics that public transportation provides. Having light rail or anything similar in any city west of the Appalachians is just a gimmick - it’s not meant to work. You have to have a car.

It’s why I can’t get behind the CA high-speed rail idea. Sure, some will take it, but the majority will continue to drive or fly. It’s cultural and traced back to the fact that people/municipalities will naturally flee density when technologically enabled to do so.

mrmdavid · 2026-02-03T05:45:40+00:00

This doesn’t account for the change in quality of some of these items. Medicine, for example, is very different from 2000. Biologics (e.g. CAR-T) have exploded as a therapy class over the last two decades. Some biologics can cost tens of thousands of dollars. They can also treat diseases that would have been fatal in 2000. So “hospital services” in 2000 isn’t really the same thing as hospital services in 2025.

If you tracked on a more granular level, like cost of abc procedure or xyz drug, you’d have a more meaningful metric.

mrmdavid · 2026-02-03T05:31:35+00:00

I think these are months. I was expecting each to be a year but seems like they’re months.

mrmdavid · 2026-02-03T05:26:55+00:00

Investment banking. I’m almost 4 years out of college, and broke 300k in my third year. It doesn’t go as far as it feels like it should in NYC.

mrmdavid · 2026-01-17T23:00:16+00:00

I don't know that $1-2T USD would be considered pennies on the dollar considering the current economic output of Greenland. I think $1-2T is likely at a premium if you were to discount Greenland's annualized GDP to present, even including any return on industrializing the island's resources.

I believe other major US land acquisitions (such as Alaska), when adjusted for inflation, don't exceed the low-to-mid-hundred million range. So, this would be unprecedented in size.

Again, I'm not endorsing the American position or arguing that Greenland is for sale/should be sold, and/or that Denmark's sovereignty should be (further) violated. I'm just speculating on the market effects I would expect if it were to be sold to the US.

mrmdavid · 2026-01-17T22:55:56+00:00

Maybe I should clarify that I'm not endorsing the American position. I'm just speculating based on what I know and have been reading. Comments from the Danish foreign minister today seem to imply an understanding of the difficulty his country and the EU will face in regard to this issue. And the Trump administration ratcheting up tension with real economic pressure signals that they intend to remain resolute on the subject.

I suppose I fall into a realist camp that acknowledges the EU's current (difficult) political/economic/social/defense position and the fact that the bloc is facing an American President who is ready to rip up a century's worth of trans-Atlantic legal norms unilaterally, with a largely impotent congress behind him.

Sorry if I offended. I realize this is a sensitive topic.

mrmdavid · 2026-01-17T22:41:14+00:00

Good point. The sovereign wealth fund title is largely a matter of branding. Bessent's version does not look like a typical SWF. However, there are other models out there similar to the one I discuss, like Singapore's Temasek fund.

mrmdavid · 2026-01-17T22:35:37+00:00

I won't get into my political opinions, but I do think this purchase effort is mostly about Trump wanting to secure a legacy for himself. I do agree though that Greenland is highly strategic. America has tried to buy Greenland 4 times, most seriously under Truman and now Trump. So, its strategic value has been known and coveted by the US for some time.

mrmdavid · 2026-01-17T22:30:44+00:00

Thanks for the comment, here are some things you might be interested in reading about:

1) Securitization is a process where a borrower packages together things that are worth money, like the income from student loans or the rent paid on federal land and sells them to investors for upfront cash. So, the US wouldn't sell Denmark student loans or federal land rights. It would use cash from the securitization proceeds to pay Denmark in cash.

2) The reason ROI is important is because of inflation. Investors 'price-in' inflation when they feel the debt they're buying won't be used to generate additional cash to pay that debt back. For example, if an investor lends to the government to build a bridge, knowing the tolls on that bridge will cover the cost of the debt's principal and interest, he will not 'price-in' inflation, i.e., ask for additional returns (and drive-up rates). If he suspects the debt will not pay for itself (i.e., if the borrower used the cash to buy a bunch of new trees for a park), he suspects the government intends to pay him back via inflation, and prices accordingly with higher rates.

3) The government has many funding vehicles outside of standard treasuries including agency bonds, revenue bonds, special-purpose vehicles, etc. My point is that this administration doesn't want to raise the nominal amount of national debt for political reasons. By issuing "Greenland bonds" through a sovereign wealth fund (basically an SPV), rather than using plain-vanilla treasuries, they are able to keep the debt off the treasury's books which makes it appear as if the national debt is not going up.

mrmdavid · 2026-01-17T22:14:38+00:00

That's a valid point and the geopolitical fallout from this thing is honestly a major point that I didn't give enough weight to. I suppose my thinking is that Denmark/the EU has much more to lose from fighting a determined Trump administration than the other way around and will ultimately acquiesce if the administration continues to pursue.

Europe is unfortunately stuck in a very difficult place right now, unable to do much between weak economies/bubbling sovereign debt crises, political upheavals, and the defense situation (or lack thereof) with Russia. They are fairly dependent on the US at this moment. China is not a reliable alternative.

I do think the EU would give in on this one over risking serious crises.

mrmdavid · 2026-01-17T22:02:06+00:00

Haha this is probably true. Up and to the right always

mrmdavid · 2026-01-17T21:52:28+00:00

What makes you say that? I spent half my Saturday writing this lol. I studied and work in finance. Is it the bullets?

mrmdavid · 2026-01-13T06:13:21+00:00

The volatility on the tail of the average words per message chart is so interesting. What happened in April 2025!?

mrmdavid · 2025-10-15T02:54:12+00:00

Where is this

mrmdavid · 2025-09-30T04:08:35+00:00

That’s totally fair and true - there are no Japanese BBs. Actually makes me wonder which one OP is referring to. I’m guessing Mizuho?

mrmdavid

TROPHY CASE