It’s interesting to think what in people’s personal perception makes them find strange thing interesting or scary or boring. Especially when it comes to grapheme.

Imagine doing computing on grapheme clusters.

That's what I thought LLMs did

Chesterton fence == I don’t have an argument but I do have a fence and you don’t, so I guess somebody should have learnt their lesson!

The thing correct information doesn’t change so it will feel like an echo chamber to people who have been taught being sold a new idea each week is the same as “challenging yourself.”

A slight bend on, “There is no such thing as an alternate fact.”

Something that seems to confound assholes.

How do you arrive at that estimate?

It’s kind of funny all those supposedly complicated technologies are actually pretty simple when you understand why you are using them. Docker is the best example, it’s hard to understand what is happening unless to understand the problem it’s solving.

Fire department disbanded

I bought bitcoin, I hate it, I think conceptually it’s really dumb, but the first rule of investment is to diversify. I just can’t ignore the fact that it’s a store of value like gold it is very bizarre why it is prioritized, but it is.

> first rule of investment is to diversify

That does not mean buy anything. Intentionality matters. Diversification is a risk mitigation strategy, but holding bitcoin increases a portfolio’s risk. So if you want to diversify to reduce risk, purchasing bitcoin is the exact opposite of what you want to do.

As the article points out, bitcoin is so volatile that having it as even 5% of your portfolio will "drastically raise its risk profile".

Unless you’re playing around with derivatives, crypto is actually fairly safe. There are price swings but the supply doesn’t magically increase because someone was ordered to print more. Therefore there is always a reasonable expectation that its value will increase over time.

The price swings with crypto are on the demand side. It is completely unsafe because there's no rhyme or reason to its demand, people just following whichever way the crowd goes, in whichever direction, and variously hoping it continues or reverses.

It's not even like gambling on an external event like whether a horse wins -- it's betting on how other people are betting.

There is absolutely no reasonable expectation that its value will increase over time. There's no reasonable expectation of anything because it has no demand-side fundamentals whatsoever.

>It is completely unsafe because there's no rhyme or reason to its demand, people just following whichever way the crowd goes, in whichever direction, and variously hoping it continues or reverses.

How is this any different to any other security? There's speculation in all markets.

It's different because other securities have a fundamental present value of future cash flows. You expect corporations you buy stocks in will pay dividends and/or be purchased by another corporation that does.

If stocks get too expensive or too cheap from what people's estimation of that present value is, we know a correction will come at some point. It always does.

But with crypto, there's utterly on sense of "too expensive" or "too cheap" or "correction". It's just betting on betting.

Regular securities are fundamental value plus limited speculation. Crypto is purely speculation that is unbounded. Two totally different things.

No, there is always a reasonable expectation that crypto will crash to near zero.

Crypto valuation is based on the greater fool theory and one day you will run out of fools.

If you’ve got a lot of working years left (and therefore can survive losing a large % of assets any given year) it’s generally a good thing to drastically raise your risk profile. Assuming you’re also raising your expected returns.

That was so funny they left out "and returns"

Like, it's valid to point to its historical volatility, but it struck me as intellectually dishonest to say it's been (historically) risky without also acknowledging that holders have (historically) been well-rewarded for their risk appetite. High Sharpe ratio, etc.

I mean, diversify, sure, but not into _everything_. Like, there are plenty of old fax machines around, but you probably shouldn’t add any to your portfolio. You have to consider whether the diversification is into something sensible.

Why are you asking for citation? Shouldn’t the person making the claim provide the evidence, instantly remove account if named man said “I take bribes.” So I believe he took a bribe. Why would you believe otherwise?

I’ve found much of the “reading” of cursive of my teachers was just basically snobbery. If it’s illegible but curly, well I just read it wrong! Illegible but straight, you makes it wrong!

In the US your insurance is literally worthless. Doctors make more money referring doctors to bullshit specialists then doing their job. I think you’re right about Swedish cheese. It does taste better.

Not saying the US system is better. But the basic problem that people just don’t care is fairly ubiquitous in the West I think.

Maybe catholic countries are doing a bit better. I sometimes get that feeling.