Seems like the 90% faster case is opening the same exact file every single time, which seems like a not super standard use case that will benefit the most from this caching. On an example where you never open the same file twice this will presumably be slightly slower than before, as you’re doing the same thing but writing to a cache.
So you can make the headline “Drop performance cost by 90%!” or “Modestly increase performance cost” and be correct but I don’t think either is really a reasonable description of the change.
Well, it might be a good decision but I think the possibility of Standard and Poor one day being worth trillions of dollars more than if they had included three companies a year or two earlier than when they inevitably join the index is absolutely zero.
SpaceX needs 4 profitable consecutive quarters to be included. If you have a lot of faith that they will achieve this I recommend you buy day 1 so you can ride the highs when the passive money eventually pours in.
> ... Standard and Poor one day being worth trillions ...
S&P - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S%26P_Global - is a business intel & analytics firm, not an investment firm. Their S&P 500 list just one of many datasets that they manage and sell. Cleverly trying to pick future winners and losers has little potential upside for them, and could put them into direct competition with many of their customers.
It's amazing how many intelligent people don't understand this. People on the internet just like to complain. Not one single person is being denied anything, each and everyone one of us can go fill up on all the high valuation unproven companies we want to, directly or through an ETF that tracks some index that is making exceptions.
Yeah - though I might phrase it "don't want to understand this". Which is, in many ways, a mindset which they are carefully taught. Late-stage capitalism's 0.01% need the 10%, or at least the 1%, to really believe that they should dutifully support the status quo, and "invest" as they are told to - no mental effort required - so that they can magically get richer & richer.
You've used the word "inevitably". Are you sure it's inevitable? SpaceX is launching at a ridiculous valuation, has two bad businesses bolted on to one modestly successful one, and all together the revenue puts the company well behind companies with a market cap vastly smaller than what they're pricing the IPO at.
This is a ridiculous situation, a ridiculous valuation, and a very risky business (data centers in space? c'mon, be serious).
People don't buy the S&P 500 because they buy the index because it spreads risk. That they won't get maximum returns is the intended risk tradeoff they want.
That people consider the S&P 500 as a vehicle for "maximum money" is precisely why it should be considered in a bubble. And why actions like the NASDAQ's fast-track exceptions are so concerning.
The moment you start making exceptions to the rules because "gotta push the stock index higher", it's game over for the entire economy.
At this point, that's what SV has been taught to expect: unlimited runway.
Look at what happened with Uber: they were a giant incinerator that ran on investment cash for years and years and years in a low interest rate environment.
Since we have an at least somewhat-sane fiscal policy for the time being, they can't do that anymore. Now, they have to find other source of cheap cash that comes with few or no strings that could ever make the almighty founder class have to consider someone else.
Could they compete with other investments on the open market by adjusting what shareholders could expect? Sure, but that would mean potentially diluting the equity that the founders and early investors could get, and when you consider that OpenAI thought that the 100x cap wasn't generous enough, I think you get an idea of what kind of greed we're dealing with here.
Passive investors were their target for this: lots of money, not a lot of questions.
It'll be interesting to see what they go for next. I'm willing to bet Trump starts screaming at the Fed to lower rates again.
A large share of invested money is passive, especially in the S&P 500. If some people pull out, it could cause a very damaging cascade. There would be a forced sale of stocks with maybe no buyers.
Well how many side projects did you ship last year? I’ve written small programs in the last few months over a weekend that would have taken me a month to do a couple years ago, and they’re better. Not in terms of code quality, but in terms of features I wanted and knew how to implement but couldn’t be bothered, Opus can do in one minute and even if it’s not the optimal implementation it’s completely functional, fine, and costs me almost nothing.
I am a professional automated sports gambler, and I win basically every day, and the handful of losing days I have per quarter are significantly smaller than the average daily win.
If you place enough bets (I make about 15k bets each day that are matched) that have a positive expected value your chances of a losing day become pretty low.
For example, I had a losing day on Christmas Day, but was only able to place about 500 bets as it was such a big holiday that there were almost no events.
It’s automated, I bet on a betting exchange which has an API, so the bets get placed without any input from me.
As it’s a betting exchange they don’t care if you win or lose as you aren’t winning money from them, but they start to take steeper cuts of your profits if you’re a regular winner above some threshold that a random punter is very unlikely to hit.
These guys never talk about the details. Either they’re LARPing or there’s something to it. “Betting exchange” is your clue. I’ve followed this thread before. Apparently the exchanges are mostly in Asia and allow people to buy and sell bets. So presumably this person is placing bets well before the date the event occurs and using them to arbitrage the result as the event nears. This is due to line movement up to the event. To participate in this you have to use btc/crypto and risk being ripped off with no legal recourse. Also presumably there’s a system around what bet to place when. They never talk about that.
To give some details, the main betting exchange I use is Betfair, a UK betting company part of the same group that own Fanduel, and I place bets for or against outcomes in the last half an hour before the start. For example, you can back a team to win meaning you make a certain amount if the team wins, but you can also lay a team, meaning that if that team doesn’t win (another team wins or it’s a draw) you win that bet, with a payout of inverse the odds. There is no crypto involved, just GBP, and Betfair is a multibillion dollar company paying taxes and subject to the law and the UK regulating bodies. I have a model to predict short term movement in the odds, which is not amazing but enough better than random that it can overcome the fees and spread between the back and lay odds and be profitable.
If you mean as a percentage of my investment, it’s about 1000%, but I can’t scale up further, so it doesn’t grow exponentially. If I increased my stake tenfold I wouldn’t be making more bets or more money. It’s like with market makers or Renaissance Technology, I’m limited by the market opportunity so the roi or sharpe ratio or whatever don’t really make sense.
Can't sell - you can buy, or find a counterparty. The exchange part is finding a counterparty.
> placing bets well before the date the event occurs and using them to arbitrage the result as the event nears.
Narrowly correct -- we could, of course, offset our X wins bet at $100 with a Y wins bet for $20. The implication is this is done by selling bets, which as mentioned above, isn't a thing in this world.
Are there some websites where this can be done? yes.
Is it widespread? No.
Is it implied by the phrase betting exchange? No.
The implication with betting exchange is "you're not betting against us, we're not making lines, we're just matching you up with a counterparty, so our incentive structure is aligned with you, we'll build an API even. also fees are much lower, its a pure rake"
> you have to use btc/crypto and risk being ripped off with no legal recourse
Sites that only take crypto do exist, but its certainly not a given or predominant.
> Also presumably there’s a system around what bet to place when. They never talk about that.
This is confusing because:
- you spelled out a system, intuitively, that most people would grok instantly (arbitrage on the line)
- "presumably" is doing 0 work, besides implying there's some hidden secret: any system involved in placing bets would have to provide information on what bet to place. :)
Generally, I don't think it's anyones job to spell out how to pull off consistent net-positive money machine, and it's quite odd to not only want it, but expect it.
Thanks for the corrections; more info to refine my understanding. In a way it seems you are the book maker and the “exchange” is the platform that lets you do it (matches bettors).
I don’t know their ways, but I expect there’s a lot of emotion in sports betting that can be exploited (bookmakers will not purely optimize for expected profit, but also want lower variance in their profits). If so, betting against clubs in rich countries where betting is popular is the better option.
Whether it beats the bookmaker’s margin I wouldn’t know.
I've probably 10 more questions, but you've already shared generously in a couple of other comments. Thanks for that. I've bookmarked, and will investigate. Best of luck with it
That’s not really a fair nit at all, he just commented that the two formats were similar, one of them must necessarily have come before the other, but they both exist right now.
reply