What i understood was all investors are buying basket of tasty cookies and no one is buying meh cookies' basket or cookies. So tasty cookies are overvalued and meh cookies are under valued.
The quality of the asset has nothing to do with this issue.
In both cases the actual buyer is an intermediary, who is managing many people's money. Those people don't even know or care what is being invested in. If for some reason many of them decide to disinvest around the same time (say a recession) they may be hurting themselves due to the asymmetrical nature of the action.
At that point, an active investor can say that any losses by holding the stock an additional month would be eclipsed by selling immediately. A passive investment does not have that ability.
"And now passive investing has removed price discovery from the [cookie] markets. The simple theses and the models that get people into [cookie baskets] -- these do not require the [cookie]-level analysis that is required for true price discovery."
>he'll embarrass himself if he actually runs for president..
I think you are underestimating the power of facebook (& fake news). He has money (64 billion USD) & he controls media (44 percent of all adults get their news from Facebook). he has already won, keep watching.
Give me a break, we supposed to protect the weak teenagers not sell them to advertisers for exploitation. They are vulnerable they need support at this time not the lucid loop of facebook. This is sad news.
Also about your "keep track of what's going on in the lives of ..", just call your friends to find out what is going on in their life. People normally don't post everything on facebook. I think its a great service if you want to know what's going on in Kim Kardashian life.
>Also about your "keep track of what's going on in the lives of ..", just call your friends to find out what is going on in their life.
I don't understand the need many people have to know what their friends are doing at all times. I check my friends' Snapchat stories sometimes, but usually I just don't care and they can tell me next time I have a conversation with them.
>Also about your "keep track of what's going on in the lives of ..", just call your friends to find out what is going on in their life. People normally don't post everything on facebook.
Not all of my Facebook friends are close enough that I'd call them to keep in touch, but it's still nice to know how they're getting on.
One of my friends from high school just finished her education to become a Doctor. Good for her. I didn't need to know that, but it's still nice, and I would never have known without something like Facebook.
>One of my friends from high school just finished her education to become a Doctor. [] I didn't need to know that, but it's still nice.
I reminded of the scene in Fight club where the narrator discovers that "Chloe died of cancer". He'd forgotten all about her, but discovering her death made him react as though sad. When challenged as to whether he cares, he says something like "I don't know, I haven't thought about her in a while".
(unnecessary reference, but I guess it frames the other side).
After I'd left uni for a couple of years Facebook became a long list of people I used to know sharing lots of minutae and a few big events in their life. Processing that has a cost, emotionally and intellectually. Is that cost worth paying? My deciding "no" doesn't mean that it's true for everyone!
The toxic thing about social media is that people are only sharing their best moments or are even trying to portrait their lives to be a lot better, then they actually are.
So if you're a depressed person on social media seeing all those awesome things people are doing, just sends you down a downward spiral, even though a lot of people are probably not much better off.
And you just said it yourself. You didn't need to know your "friend" got her doctors and your life probably had zero impact from knowing, which really is the best case szenario with social media.
I am not saying, social media serves no porpuse though. For event organizing and crowd funding and probably a lot of other things, it comes in handy.
Slightly tangential experiment: I'm commenting here because this thread is quite close to the top of the page, and the top-level comment I left with the following info is not likely to become un-buried at this point.
Just wanted to say that the paywalled article in The Australian can be viewed via cache: just fine:
I don't think stupidhn is advancing that logic as an argument for why Uber should be let off. I think they're saying that many people on HN are part of the (disruptive, gig-economy, resource-sharing) startup ecosystem and would be adversely affected by Uber failing, directly or indirectly; so they are either choosing to let them off or subconsciously predisposed to support Uber.
It's basically the same as the famous Upton Sinclair quote: “It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.”
I'm not saying I agree with the point, but my interpretation is different from yours. To your point, it is somewhat similar to saying, "Why haven't we found a cure for cancer? Because too many oncologists are dependent on the cancer treatment ecosystem." It's not exactly the same, for many reasons, but there is a similar line of possibly-specious reasoning.
Amazon charges sellers 8-15% per each sale in addition to FBA Fees so only way a seller can make money is by selling counterfeit. Amazon is getting greedy, sellers are cutting corner and customers are paying price.
