anameaname

Following the law isn't black and white. I'm sure each of us as individuals broke the several times today without even knowing it.

The paper that was linked suggests using derivatives rather than directly taking out loans, which are financially convertible. Specifically it says buying deeply ITM call options for several years out strike date.

In Item 10 it says:

> One study I remember showed that young investors should use 2x leverage in the stock market, because – statistically – even if you get wiped out you’re still likely to earn superior returns over time.

And the linked paper says:

> The mistake in translating this theory into practice is that young people invest only a fraction of their current savings, not their discounted lifetime savings. For someone in their 30's, investing even 100% of current savings is still likely to be less than 10% of their lifetime savings

This makes a lot of sense to me and says what I haven't been able to about my own risk tolerance. What is OPs counter to this? That the paper's conclusions are flawed, or that no 20-something could execute it?

I've use Go's context based cancellation, and while I like the paradigm, it's kind of verbose. There are some that say that since it has to be passed everywhere, and can store values, it's equal to Goroutine-local storage. I'm would be surprised if they don't include a formalization in the language itself in version 2.

You are right, editted.

As another surprising thing, calling interrupted() actually clears the interrupted bit. If it's true, you pretty much have to throw InterruptedException. Otherwise, you have to re set the bit, and exit quietly.

Net income is not that useful of a metric since both companies are still growing.

This is on purpose. If the number of support people is a linear function of the number of users, the business cannot grow past half the worlds population.

This is what you get when you don't have a top-down management style. Teams are given too much freedom, leading to inconsistency. No one has the whole vision of how a product should work. Even if they did have that, they likely don't have the authority to make it happen.

Large transfer's wouldn't be the place where the effect would be noticeable, it would be JSON payloads that can fit in a few packets. If operators would do this seldomly enough to not be noticed, why do they need the bit at all? It feels like a blank (albeit single digit) check.

Realistically, are network operators going to add artificial delay to packets going through their network? If they don't get their bit, and they start slowing down communication, it would seem like market correction would solve it.

> QUIC (aka HTTP/3)

Why focus on QUIC when the JS APIs to use it aren't available? Numerous of the features of HTTP/2 aren't usable (i.e. trailers, flow control, security sensitive headers, priority, etc.).

I don't understand how the web is supposed to flourish without giving web developers some kind of access to these tools. Meanwhile, app developers are showered with such goodies.

Dissenting opinion: I think the blocky version looks better when not zoomed in. The sample on the left is less smoothed, and doesn't look as airbrushed. It looks better when zoomed in, but not when are regular zoom.