Leaving aside the bitcoin angle, this is actually a pretty good primer explanation of the market mechanics and psychology behind technical analysis.
Readit Newsthrowaway9848 commented on This bitcoin graph has become so accurate again at the moment, it's scary tradingview.com/v/sSmoerF... · Posted by u/bonbon
throwaway9848 commented on Sad News for the Opscode Community opscode.com/blog/2013/12/... · Posted by u/benatkin
Unlikely, because cancer is not one thing but many. Each kind of cancer behaves differently, is susceptible to different treatments. And I once read an article about a genetic analysis that found dozens of completely different strains of cells in a single tumor.
http://www.esquire.com/features/patient-zero-1213 gives a pretty good feel for the challenges in treating cancer.
I wanted to buy right when it hit $850 a few days ago. I redeemed my $11k mutual fund, but the wire transfer took until Friday to go trough. By the time I was able to buy bitcoins, they were $1111 on coinbase. Bought anyway. Got 9.89BTC.
Just lost $2k of that investment, according to the markets. Though it seems to be recovering somewhat. Ow.
Anyway, I'm long on bitcoin. Maybe it will crash and I'll lose everything. Twice it's crashed, then the recovery has eclipsed the previous peak by several X. So I don't know.
I do know that if banks hasn't been so slow, then I would currently be telling the story of "I was able to grow $11k into $13k." One problem BTC solves is moving money around instantly. It doesn't close for Thanksgiving holiday.
Mtgox needs to become wiser as well. There's currently no trade fees, because they wanted to participate in BTC Black Friday. That kind of thing encourages people who are holding onto $15k coins to sell all of them if they think the market will go down. An extra 0.4% on that much money is significant. Mtgox really shouldn't be so willy nilly.
For the love of god, be sensible - sell half on Monday and put it back into a traditional retirement investment. You'll still do well if BTC goes up. There is no reason to put 100% of your retirement funds into any single asset.
Deleted Comment
throwaway9848 commented on Inside the race to rescue a health site, and Obama nytimes.com/2013/12/01/us... · Posted by u/kanamekun
Mandatory coverage was another wealth transfer; when 30% of patients are not paying for their medical treatments, and the other 70% are being forced to cover that cost, it is a wealth transfer.
To be clear, I am not saying wealth transfers are bad, but we should be honest about what is happening.
I do see where you're coming from. Maybe if I said I don't believe it's a _new_ wealth transfer? 30% of the population is not going without care today - they are getting ER care for non-emergent reasons or they're covered by Medicaid or the VA. The Medicaid/VA is a direct cost and the ER visits are indirect via increased costs.
Unless we want to decide as a country to not subsidized healthcare for those that can't afford it and to allow hospitals to refuse treatment without upfront payment... then let's be honest about what's happening there, too. The money comes from somewhere, it's every bit as much of a wealth transfer.
throwaway9848 commented on Inside the race to rescue a health site, and Obama nytimes.com/2013/12/01/us... · Posted by u/kanamekun
The subsidies and relative price fixing are wealth transfers, why else would they exist?
The subsidies are to poor people. The poor people get medical care anyway, at ERs, where hospitals cannot refuse them. Or they forgo the care until mundane problems become chronic or acute problems (and they end up in the ER). ERs happen to be the most expensive means of providing heath care. So, to answer the first part of your question, the subsidies exist so that people who cannot afford heath insurance via the exchanges can still have health insurance. And the reasoning behind it is to reduce health care costs that emerge from lack of access to care.
I know less about the age rating bands. Off the top of my head, it's to smooth costs over a lifetime. So it's a wealth transfer from your young self to your old self, if you have typical health care costs over your lifetime: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1361028/
edit: http://www.rwjf.org/content/dam/farm/reports/issue_briefs/20... for more on age banding.
throwaway9848 commented on Inside the race to rescue a health site, and Obama nytimes.com/2013/12/01/us... · Posted by u/kanamekun
> Get sick or old and then tell me how bad the ACA is.
Beneficiaries of wealth transfer are fans of the wealth transfer! Film at 11.
I'm a safe driver. Why should I have to pay for auto insurance? It's a wealth transfer to bad drivers.
... And actually, I completely reject your characterization of it as a wealth transfer. It's insurance. You have no idea if you're going to need it. You may be in a car accident and badly break your legs, and require corrective surgery and rehab. You may get pneumonia or a bad MERSA infection. If you haven't saved up a few hundred thousand dollars and you show up at an ER, then the wealth transfer is to you when the hospital eats the cost and passes it along to properly insured people. That's not even going chemo/surgery should you develop cancer, god forbid.
throwaway9848 commented on Inside the race to rescue a health site, and Obama nytimes.com/2013/12/01/us... · Posted by u/kanamekun
no offense, man, it is just sound like you've never developed or deployed Enterprise Identity and Access Management. I envy you :) The keyword here is "Enterprise" - insanely complex [lets just don't touch whether such complexity is really necessary, it is just the fact of a design to meet any possible RFP in the space :) ] and [in many aspects as a result of the complexity] slow non-scalable products.
>The rest of it sounds like they botched making this system scalable
these systems just don't scale. In a BigCo with local replication to regional sites it takes noticeable time for such systems to perform. Trying to build such a website - well, it is a government procurement, though i don't think this is a worse one around (Halliburton's and the likes' cost+ in Iraq/Afganistan definitely bigger :).
>normally a single table with fields like
It is "normal" from another world :) The simple way you described would be done by some startup, and they would horizontally partition it when time come to scale. It is not the way the "Enterprise" things are done.
I would guess the user database is 11NF and has 1000 tables. The UML form of it cannot exist in our limited 4 dimensions of space and time :)
Deleted Comment
throwaway9848 commented on Inside the race to rescue a health site, and Obama nytimes.com/2013/12/01/us... · Posted by u/kanamekun
If your previous policy was cancelled due to ACA and you can't get a new one because the enrollment processes for the exchanges are broken, you get to enjoy a gap in coverage. That is never a good thing.
A gap in coverage is not as much a problem any more, thanks to the ACA.
edit: Hey downvoter, let me educate you - the worst thing about a coverage gap used to be the potential to have an illness classified as a preexisting condition, and then to never be able to get private insurance coverage again. The ACA prohibits that practice by insurers as of next year. Here, I even dug up a pre-ACA article on the practice for you, served up on a silver platter: http://articles.latimes.com/2006/sep/17/business/fi-revoke17
edit 2: You know what, prospective downvoters can kiss my butt. Sorry that you don't like the health care reform law. It may be a total mess, but it's no worse that it was before. The only people that are pissed off are healthy, young people (hello, HN) that are paying next to nothing for individual coverage that is garbage. Get sick or old and then tell me how bad the ACA is.