Jerry_Atrick

BTW, if you really want to stop the rent takers of the economy, start using cash for as many purchases as possible. Every card transaction - and I do mean every one - results with some going to one of two payments companies in the US. Even our dear eftpos has to pay a fee.

Although largely correct, my understanding of stablecoin is that it has to be backed by a liquid asset to derive its value. In other words, we would treat it as a derivative financial instrument when pricing it. I am not sure how the inversion of the dollar value would send the stablecoin up in value. It effectively becomes a proxy for directly buying US Treasuries in this case. There is no mandate for a stable coin to buy anything.. but on issuing more of the currency the stablecoin can do one of two things.. not buy any, which will dilute the value of the already issued coin as well as that of the newly issued coin, or top up their reserves of whatever is backing the stablecoin - in this case US Treasuries. These holding represent hedges against the loss of value of the coin against the currency they are stabilised against. Importantly, they don't have to buy up new US Treasuries (or whatever currency they are stabilised against), and they don't have to buy the debt - they can hold cash reserves - though that is far more expensive. I am nto sure about the retail market, but any intitutional interest in a properly hedged stablecoin as a result of a decrease in the demand of the asset backing it would not lead to an increase in demand.. In fact, it would go the other way. In the above case, if they saw the dollar dropping, they would probably take short positions in that coin (note, assuming this is not speculative) because even if it took a while for the hype of the retail investors in the coin to wear down, the coin would drop to its actual value... Also, for the coin to remain a stablecoin, as it dfoes not have cash as a hedge, it would likely have to buy more US Treasuries to maintain its stable status, and that could squeeze its finances and eventually cause it to break from the claim of stablecoin, which would then kill demand and value as it becomes another meme coin after that, or go into massive debt to hold its value. If the dollar stayed long term depressed, either way, the coin will eventually go with it from a retail investor perspective. That is my favourite. Errr.. Yes they did.. They knew tariffs were coming, and from his first stint in office, they knew he was going to be a lying, corrupt con artist. The fact this bit was not in his policy did not mean he wasn't going to try to use the presidency to disproportionately enrich himself corruptly. It could have been any myriad of ways to do it.. And yes, you just had to listen to his policy speeches (rallies) and realise he was all about tanking the US economy through increased debt and tariffs, and being a dictator. It seems that people are really no smarter than any other animal - you offer them a morsel of bait with a giant hook in it, they will not see the hook and just take the bait, hook, line, and sinker (in fact, some animals seem smarter as when they see the hook, they nibble at the bait but not take the hook). And then they will start thrashing about trying to get off the hook as they are drawn to the usually inevitable conclusion. In the aftermath of the initial policy implementations, it was educating to see how many people who voted for Chump say they didn't vote for the policies he implemented - the very same policies he was very clear about implementing before the election... Teachers voted for slashes to the education budget, government workers voted for DOGE, undocumented immigrant families voted for ICE.. those on SNAP having it withdrawn, and the list goes on. It was absolutely mind boggling when they would turn up on youtube and MSM and say they didn't vote for that... What they thought for some reason is it wouldn't happen to them.. when it was clear it would. And the funny thing was they often said they would still vote for him... They are getting exactly what they voted for.

Although to smaller extents, there are a few more countries I could think of that could fit that bill.

80 doesn't seem to be a good number for celebrities this month

I am sure Iran will happily purse Chump himself, but apparently, there is now a bounty of his son, Baron.. so he has succeeded in drawing his own kid into the line of fire: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/barron-trump-threat-iran-bounty-war-b3038679.html I bet whichever of his wives is Baron's mum is ecstatic at the idea.

Think of all that GST they can reclaim without a penny of revenue?

As with everything, ultimately the consumer and more broadly, the general population ends up carrying the costs

Dolly Parton has passed away aged 80.. in very long article on the ABC news website, it only mentioned health issues. SWMBO will be devastated

Just got a call from the shop. Apparently the connectors on the loom side of the regulator were knackered (though I thought I checked them... so when I pick up the bike I will see what I missed).. And also, the new regulator itself is a dud. So they are taking a video of it so I can use as evidence to get my £ back... The company that supplied me the regulator should be OK with it though, as the shop is replacing it with one from the same company I purchased from and they have good reputation. Regulator won't arrive until tomorrow and I will not be able t collect until Thursday afternoon... So to London by train this time.

I thought I would ask the question of ChatGPT. Here is the link of the question and answer. https://chatgpt.com/share/6a8d541b-5b14-83ed-b954-fe3fef4f12b3 Not much in it.

The bike went to its next mechanic yesterday. I spoke to the mechanic looking at it, and he was a little stumped. He thinks it may be the stator though as he has a hunch whatever is happening is happening with "random regularity" rather than just intermittently. Today he will be pulling out the stator and putting it through a "sniff test". Apparently, a single wind can be on its way out and cause all sorts of mayhem.

Sounds like drinkable yoghurt.

Drop the prompt/question answer verbatim in here - would be very interesting

Actually, I know many Aussies who lived in the UK because they could earn more here and regularly send money to Aus mostly to buy a house. Most have moved back to Aus

BTW, you can replace drawing balls in an entry with this bit of python code: import secrets def draw_numbers(): return sorted(secrets.SystemRandom().sample(range(1, 45), 6)) print(draw_numbers()) That is it..

The outcome is totally random - yes. As I mentioned, a historical simulation may show a more or less universal distribution of drawn numbers, in which case the odds and the probability would be the same for all practical purposes. However, a historical simulation may show certain combinations of number drawn more often than others material enough to be a pattern or series of patterns emerging that increases the probability of sets of numbers being drawn. The draw is stall random, but the probability - and that is all it is - a probable and no guaranteed - set of drawn numbers may become higher than any old random selection. This could be because of say manufacturing imperfections of the balls where minutely different weight distributions result on some balls being more likely to be scooped than others.. And it could be that the probability if subsequent balls being drawn changes depends on what ball/s were previously drawn for the same reasons. In order to prove it, you would need a lot of data, including that of the factors that we define as determinative to the probability - but without those factors, we can only rely on the historical number draws. Given the permutations and combinations, coming to a single set of numbers likely to be drawn using a historical simulation would improve the probability - but only marginally at best. These simulations predict probable outcomes over various scenarios and normally a confidence level is provided. And it will be a probability map. So for example, it may give a probability for each number of that number being drawn first. For each number, it will give the probability of every other number being drawn second. Then for each number drawn second of the number that was drawn first, it will come up with a probability of each number not drawn yet to be drawn third, and so on. Taking this approach, there are 130m nodes in the map for each number drawn first. So, if 1 is drawn first, there will be a map of 130m possible permutations and combinations. Now multiply by 6 and that is how big the probability map will be. You can use a binary coefficient approach to reduce it, but you attenuate the probability calculation as a result because we don't know the factors that are causing some numbers to be picked more than others. Anyway, for a 6/45 lottery draw, the probability map reaches something like 900m nodes, each with a confidence factor. Of course, if we could pick our numbers just before each number is drawn, we could really improve our probability of winning. But we can't, so the only way to really improve the probability is to try and predict what the first through 6th number is going to be dependent on what we think the first number is going to be. So, in defining our confidence level, we have to look for any other correlations. As we have virtually no other known factors, the only thing I can think of is to look at time based cycles and add that to the algorithm to predict the different potential numbers to draw. And that is the rub. Coming up with one most likely to draw is not really going to to reduce it much; intuitively, I would reckon you need to put around 200k minimum bets on it spread across the different scenarios. And, it is still not guaranteed. I have no idea what the cost of a singe entry is, or 200k entries are against the normal prize value. So, it may be futile.. buit the above is a glimpse of algo trading (well, that would get smashed in the markets.. so I would not recommend it). Now I am rambling as I have had my first wine in 6 months - a Jim Barry McLaren Vale.. and very nice. What impressed me is my local Majestic Wines knew exactly which aisle I was heading for when I entered the shop... I digress. Anyway, chasing the single winning entry will probably not yield too much more likelihood than the basic odds.. it is how you play the probability map.

I currently live under a Ln optional voting and fist past the post system. I am not sure Farage would have been successful given the low voter turnout (44%) delivering him a 27% vote of the total electors in his seat

Sadly, this is as much as a reflection of society as it is of the media. If society didn't watch it, the media wouldn't produce it. Of course, if that is all the media publishes, it leaves people with only a choice not to watch and do something else.. and as creatures of comfort or convenience, people will probably take the idle path.

Of course, no AI or other software can change the odds of winning. But I would argue odds and probability are statistically two different things. The lotto is a totally random selection of 6 or so numbers from 45 (depending which lottery it is you are playing). That gives 1 in 14m-ish odds. We'll leave the system entries out. If you buy a ticket - you have exactly 1 in 14m-ish chances of winning. That is the odds regardless. Assuming you have randomly selected the numbers or say used a child's birthday week in, week out, you are likely to have the same probability as odds. But if you use some sort of historical simulation - especially something like a path-dependent Monte Carlo simulation which assumes randomness in the probability chain, you may detect certain patterns of numbers which come up more often than others. The more data sampling points you have, the more likely these patterns will repeat. However, below a certain threshold, the simulation is meaningless, and you would have to introduce variables into your simulation that you thought were material - that could be simply the combinations of numbers, slight imperfections in the balls that result in certain balls being in the scooping place more often relative to others, the order in which the balls are selected may also change that, the humidity even, etc etc. The point is, with enough historical data, you won't need to observe all those other minutiae factors as the patterns will tell their own story... And you may find, it can better predict the numbers likely to be drawn... and although your odds are exactly the same because it is a totally random draw, your probability of striking it lucky may increase. Of course, because the draw is totally random, it is not fool proof.. But it may say something like, for each number, if it is drawn first, this is the likely set of drawn numbers, and if the number drawn second is x, this is the likely set of following drawn numbers, etc.

I know, but it was funny.

I did rip this off Farcebook (while looking for a cheap and cheerless runabout before getting the next car)

Yes.. they are.. In terms of thread drift, I meant not changing it solely to a discussion about Tesla.

Back to climate change and combating it.. I haven't looked at the video yet, but as I understand, replacing the tanks with batteries and the ICE engine with motors, we are looking at c. 677 kms with a fully loaded truck. I did a google search and a Kenworth loaded to 44000lbs (number sticks in my head for some reason) will have a range of 1200 - 1800 miles - so around 2,000 to 2,800 kms give or take. I doubt any truck driver would do that in a day, but then I thought road trains loaded to their max weight after which AI told me it was 1,400 - 2,400 kms. I am guessing a truck with a single driver only will not do much more than 677kms in a day. But without changing stations, it would be interesting to see how long it would take for those big batteries to recharge sufficiently. Over here, the smaller commercial fleet is electrifying rapidly. This will put pressure on the grid, but will have to drive renewables to help.

At the risk of thread drift, they may be, but the used EV market is, at best, immature still. Also, I guess the used market is a measure of what has been, not what is coming. And, although not a fan boy, I like Teslas.. My point is that Tesla's engineering - once pioneering - seems to have been well overtaken. Yes, the Chinese have the state subsidies Tesla doesn't directly get (and probably indirectly reduced significantly since Musk's spat with Chump), but even in the innovation stakes, Tesla seems to be falling behind.. The Cyberfluck was a vanity project gone massively wrong., so let's discount that one. But, they have been at EV trucks for years and it looks like they have yet to crack that one. Their EV car offerings don't seem to have moved that much, and their quality control (at least in the USA plant) is apparently still woeful. And we shoudl remember, Tesla is a single company, not some institutionalised dev and research centre. Of course, they are a single company that is multi-faceted facing a whole industry (or number of industries). and I should have contextualised my observation to the EV market rather than everything Tesla does.. And maybe that is part of the problem for Tesla (not including Spacex in that).. They are in so many pies, will they be tha jack of all and master off none. So, I asked Chat where they stood against their competitors for innovation. There were too many categories to take a screen shot, so here is Chat's analysis (lazy, I know): AI Driving (autonomous I guess): Strongest commercially scalable but competitors have better proven tech Robotaxi/Cybercab: Middle of the range AI hardware: Most vertically scalable - ahead of the pack Batteries; Middle of the range on technology (still leading commercial position). Fast charging: Has been overtaken - Now at the lower end of the pack. Note, that could be commercially - Chat didn't say, so lets say it is in the middle of the pack now technically Charging Ecosystem (I am guessing this is the commercial bit): Ahead of the game with over 80k installations Grid batteries: Still ahead of the game Commercial humanoid robots: Potential there; behind the pack for deployment. Solar home energy - Still ahead of the pack. This was the prompt I used: "what are teslas latest technology innovations and how do they compare to the competition" So overall, they are they are still technically innovative - yes.