I do not believe aerodynamic stability depends on whether the inputs change or not. For instance, stall a Cessna 172 and it will tend to pitch down on its own even if you keep pulling on the yoke.

Also an aerodynamically unstable plane isn't a plane in which a stall is irrecoverable. It's a plane that, left to its own devices, will not make things better for you.

Please look up what 'amnesty' means. Apple isn't doing anything wrong or illegal by keeping its cash outside of the US. Also note the the US tax code is the only one (in advanced countries) to try to tax earnings made outside of its jurisdiction (e.g. for earnings made in Japan, and already taxed locally there).

Cook is not saying Apple shouldn't pay taxes, he simply says the IRS has no business taking 40% of earnings not made in the US. If you were an expat you would strongly agree with him.

'Amnesty' was indeed a poor example. Call it a special repatriation tax rebate, or whatever.

Otherwise, you're reading far too much into my comment. With the current tax rules as given, I merely suggested a possible compromise.

At no point did I argue for/against the rules, and at no point did I agree/disagree with what Cook is saying.

Is it futuristic because it runs tests concurrently?

It also shoots lasers, runs from the gpu and is in the cloud

Edit: despite i made myself giggle, I realize this comment is disrespectful to the hard work the ava team put in. I will stand by it though because I believe its to the benefit of people to realize how intention and theme doesnt necessarilly match reality. But I love spaceships more than coffee tbh (hard competition though)

Edit: i love how my comment was upvoted before my second. Glad we are a thoughtful group. Basically that tells me emotional responses are rewarded/punished rather than arguably productive. Criticism is important

Probably because it's named after the humanoid character portrayed by Alicia Vikander in Ex Machina.

Are you saying that aviation is inherently less safe in non-predominantly english speaking countries?

I think routes, prevailing weather, average crew experience, average aircraft age, geographic (topographic features) , airspace complexity and about a thousand other things go into that accident statistics. I couldn't find solid numbers in my 2 min google search, but I would think English speaking countries are probably close to the top of the list in terms of safety.

Plus there is a difference when South Korean maintenance personnel work on South Korean planes flow by South Korean crews, than just sending a US plane to the lowest contract bid in the developing world.

I did not say that. I'm sure best maintenance facilities for TUs and ILs are in Russia.

I am going to say though flying is safer in the developed world. US based passenger airlines did not have one fatality since February 2009.

It's more just rich places. Europe, North America and Australia/Japan have very good safety records, and some don't speak English natively.

These places all have highly developed regulatory bodies that communicate with manufacturers and each other. Most happen to enforce English to ease communication on safety related issues.

That is a statement of fact.

Correct maybe. Useful, certainly not.

Thank you sincerely for the feedback.

Some of our users find it useful, for example, to know how much of a trade a particular counter-party can absorb. While it doesn't establish the efficacy of the manager (or even come close), we find it interesting in terms of individual entity trading power. Readers' mileage will certainly vary. Based on your feedback, we'll try to be more clear about those points in future reports.

I'm even less convinced about the usefulness knowing "how much of a trade a particular counter-party can absorb". And somehow deriving this information from the current book size (as opposed to available capital) also seems somewhat dubious.

Moreover, absent the AUM (or leverage) and asset mix, this number won't tell you much about the actual size of the book.

How good is your index if you don't capture local shocks?

Any practical reason you'd want a "non brand related" index? The way I understand it the Big Mac index is pretty good because it casts a wide net from the cost of producing (or importing) food to the price of labour, and everything in between. I doubt you'd get that with a potato.

While it's true that the price of labor, production, transportation, etc, would affect the cost of the Big Mac, it's still ultimately up to McDonalds to set the price, deciding what sort of margin they want from the product, maybe taking into account stuff like brand recognition.

So, using something like the potato would eliminate that sort of "bias" to the product, as no one party controls the potato, and thus couldn't artificially set the price higher at a whim. If the price of the potato rose, it would be because the whole market reacted to some changes to transportation or production costs, not because management has decided that they want to build their brand as being expensive and exclusive (which we know happens with a lot of brand products).

1) I think you're asking too much of what is essentially a silly experiment.

2) What if potatoes become hip?

3) If you want auditable PPP conversion rates: http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/PA.NUS.PPP

There are dozens of varieties of potato. Not all have the same costs to go from seed to market.

What is a 'potato'?

And:

3. The number of good developers is unrelated to the number of H1-B issued