If the entire universe were turned into a giant computer and did nothing but generate uuids until its heat death, how many bits would you need for the ID space?
"But are you worried that every human on Earth will be hit by a meteorite right now? That probability is also non-zero, yet it is so infinitesimally small that we treat it as an impossibility."
This might be a bad example because one meteorite could take out the world and given enough time is likely to.
They have 6000 employees located in Ireland including most of their support staff for the EU. They just opened another office in Dublin. They are also there for 45 years already, so not sure where "just a po box" comes from.
The issue wasn't that the CEO was missing when they dropped by the Panama address. Rather it was that the (supposed) registered agent didn't know who they were.
If I say "contact my lawyer" and you show up to his office and the receptionist informs you that I'm not a client ...
So what? A registered agent is literally the agent registered to accept process service. The registered agent is clearly not the corporate headquarters, a branch office, or anything other than a business whose purpose is to accept lawsuits, subpoenas, and other legal and official notices.
Well, that's the same thing the NPR article is reporting on, which is the equivalent legal concept in Panamanian law.
Polymarket's actual offices are remote-first, but they have a small space set up in New York City which is the closest thing they have to an HQ. It's basically set up like a coworking / hotel sort of space.
It's an interesting "problem". The cities we have now exist because businesses and people want to be located in the same geographical area to maximize, well, doing business.
Now the opposite is happening. Businesses have no incentive being located in the same physical area they do business in. In fact, they have opposite incentives. The closer they are to their customers and workers, the less they can do things with impunity.
The modern world is like Jean Baudrillard's vision of hell. Back in 1991 he wrote "The Gulf War did not take place", commenting on what was at the time a new development of 24/7 live media coverage of the war. Media saturation created a hyperreality where images about the war replaced the thing itself. How far we have come. We are so complacent here that war exists only as stream of symbols and sounds streaming out of our screen. I think many do not truly believe it is real.
So far only the Nasdaq-100 has gone along with SpaceX's special weighting chicanery. The biggest fund which tracks the Nasdaq-100 is QQQ. Suffice to say, if you have money in QQQ you should be re-considering that position.
Either way, no, high frequency trading firms are going to beat you to the punch. And shorting elons other company, just because it's over valued by traditional metrics, didn't work out that great for most traders.
This is a slightly tongue-in-cheek way of saying that if you believe a security is severely mispriced then there is a straightforward way to express that opinion.
Shorting is really not that straightforward. It is a avery advanced topic because it mandates the use of leverage. Many (most) investors are long-only, especially the ones being taken advantage of here.
> especially the ones being taken advantage of here.
This is a great argument why buying an index is a poor choice for a long term investor. You can avoid a great deal of shenanigans by randomly purchasing stocks and holding them for 50 years. Even a 0.02% annual fee costs you 1% of your long term returns over that timescale.
Index investing is a great choice for a long term investor who cares about simplicity, which should be the vast majority of them. Actually the best thing about holding individual stocks is probably the increased opportunities for TLH, but the nightmare of holding and managing hundreds of securities in your account is very seldom worth what you save on fees or deferred taxes.
You still owe the taxes on dividends generated by an index fund that automatically reinvests dividends. There’s ways around this like a 401k, but you can also own individual stocks inside a 401k or rollover to an account that lets you do so.
I don't know how that's a response to what I wrote. I'm not saying that an ETF is more tax efficient, although it is more tax efficient than a mutual fund. If you are worried about the tax drag of dividends then there are ETFs that seek to track spx, but without receiving dividends, by selling and rebuying around ex div dates. They're not established enough to trust with a lot of money, imo, but maybe it will become more normal one day.
Tesla has been this for a long time since the price fundamentally does not reflect the quality or future of the company, yet the road is littered with dead Tesla bears.
Efficient markets hypothesis breaks down with Musk companies.
One way to think about this is you have a binomial distribution with p=0.8 and n=number of lying friends. Each time you increase n, you shift the probability mass of the distribution "to the right" but if n is even some of that mass has to land on the "tie" condition.
There are a few markets like Jacksonville and Atlanta where there is a lot of institutional ownership, but outside of those few cases impact of Blackrock et al on housing markets is effectively nil.
To summarize the article: buying the Yes side of this market is like shorting treasuries. It's not a bet that treasuries will default, but rather a macro bet about that demand for cash (i.e. interest rates) will increase.
If the entire universe were turned into a giant computer and did nothing but generate uuids until its heat death, how many bits would you need for the ID space?