Option 1 is a 20% down payment on a $450K mortgage, so a $90K down-payment (10% yield) and a $360K investment in the market (7%) and a $360K mortgage (0.53%).
Option 2 is a $450K cash purchase of a house, which, on average, appreciates at the fed target inflation rate of 2%.
Indeed although in both cases you own the home and are subject to the same depreciation risk right? Although if you're willing to take a credit hit, I suppose you're shifting that depreciation onto the bank.
Hi David, thanks for the article. Maybe poker, basketball, and Starcraft are highly correlated hobbies among software engineers in the Bay area, but I find it incredible that we share such similar interests. Starcraft not as much for me anymore, despite my HN username (though I still play maybe once a month or so).
Thanks for reading! Whoa, do you still play BW once a month, or is that SC2? I never started playing SC2, so I actually had to look up Artosis pylon. I def remember Manner pylon though :)
And hmm, I actually didn't think I'd find ANY readers at the intersection of startups, CS, SC, poker and basketball. Assuming most people on HN are interested in startups and computer science, I'd imagine that the limiting area of intersection would probably be SC ∩ bball (at least more so than SC ∩ poker or poker ∩ bball), so it's pretty awesome that we share all of those!
You've convinced me of your point, but I only understood about 25% of what you said. How can I get more educated on this subject? I'm not really interested in actually executing any of these strategies you mentioned, just learning about them.
The extent of my knowledge just comes from reading /r/wallstreetbets for entertainment, while doing passive index fund investing for personal finance.
I'm far from an expert. I don't trade professionally (i.e. I don't derive my income from it), and I'm a chemical engineer by day.
I think the best resource for anyone starting out investing would be "A Random Walk Down Wall Street" (Burton Malkiel), and maybe "The Intelligent Investor" (Benjamin Graham), even if you don't intend to be a traditional value investor. I think these books (I'll admit I haven't read all of The Intelligent Investor) set your expectations. I also listen to Masters in Business, Odd Lots, and P&L podcasts by Bloomberg (P&L is more short-term, while MiB and Odd Lots are more generally applicable). Both of those books might be floating around the internet.
I also really enjoyed "The Physics of Wall Street" (James Weatherfall). It's a look into how financial mathematics got started and how it has grown and been increasingly applied in modern finance.
If you're interested in options and other derivatives (I find derivatives to be the most interesting, and least arbitrary, financial product), I'd start with John Hull's "Options, Futures, and Other Derivatives", which is a textbook at maybe the sophomore or junior level. I hear the PDF is freely circulated online. I think understanding how options and futures work is essential for understanding finance. A slightly more technical text, "Dynamic Hedging" (Nassim Nicholas Taleb) is also good (and maybe also available online somewhere...). It is less philosophical and polemic than his other books, but doesn't resist calling you an idiot either, as is Taleb's style.
You might also find work on non-ergodicity (Ole Peters), the Kelly criterion, universal portfolios (Thomas Cover, 1991), and Ed Thorpe (a mathematician who derived a precursor to the famous Black-Scholes model) of interest (Ed Thorpe is an incredibly interesting person in his own right). If you find yourself wanting to get into technical analysis, I'd recommend "Evidence-Based Technical Analysis" by David Arons (a spoiler: the evidence is not good). If you're interested in ML applied to trading, I keep seeing references to Advances in Financial Machine Learning (Marcos Lopez de Prado), although I haven't actually read it.
Regarding other financial products, CME has a large number of resources available for understanding futures trading, although futures are generally too high value for regular traders to use safely (the highly liquid /ES contract controls ~$130,000 exposed to the S&P500 and allows one to take about 22x margin, or even as high as 250x for intraday trading). Similarly, there are some nice introductions to the forex market, but again I'd caution you to stay away. And as much as I'd similarly caution you about blindly following their advice (and in general about being a "volatility seller"[1,2] -- see Taleb's book), TastyTrade produces a ton of videos on options trading (particularly retail options trading), which include the mechanics of options trading and how their trading platform works (which is similar to TD's platform -- the CEO/Founder, Sosnoff, was involved in the development of it when he was at TD). You can download TD's ThinkorSwim and paper trade options, or just "preview" their application with delayed prices and see how options work.
Finally, rather than r/wallstreetbets (which is now 99% low quality memes and loss porn), I'd recommend checking out r/options and r/thewallstreet, which are more professional forums, and potentially forums such as EliteTrader and Nuclear Phynance as well.
Glad to hear the tool works well for FB employee's. As always the contribution to the community is much appreciated. But as others have pointed out, the tool name could use a rebranding. The popular SonarCube is just one example where confusion can arise.
Thanks for bringing the naming up. I wasn't aware of these other tools. SonarQube looks interesting, though! Just to clarify, I don't contribute to Sonar development, I'm just a heavy user. I think the team is aware of your concerns now though (Emil is the OP and works on Sonar development).
Facebook has been using it internally for a long time. It would make no sense for them to rename the tool for open-source release just because a naming conflict exists, unless you'd prefer they just not release it at all?
We typically do rename before open sourcing and intend to avoid namespace collisions. E.g. Litho was not the original name of that framework either.
I am familiar with most of the other tools mentioned here (e.g. SonarJava) from my time doing Java development outside of Facebook and never had a collision in my head because this project is not actually a library or tool for Java. It's a standalone Electron app that works on iOS and Android for debugging purposes, the only Java part is incidental in the Android app (and could be Kotlin or C++ or whatever you want).
That's a bad example. Gerrit is not a new name for Reitveld, it's a totally new implementation (with similar inspiration). And both of those were publicly released under those names.
It can and has been done multiple times in the past - AsyncDisplayKit -> Texture is the one that immediately comes to mind as it happened after open-sourcing.
Nothing, business. It's a conglomerate. A business that's function is running businesses. A Yamaha piano has nothing at all to do with a Yamaha motorcycle exactly opposite to how all of Amazon's services are related and intertwined.
By definition, each NP-complete problem is provably as hard as another though. Graph coloring can be reduced in polynomial time to every NP-C problem. It doesn't really make sense to me that one problem can just "look so doable" when they're really just the same problems.
They are of course all reducible to each other but that doesn't necessarily mean that they are all equally hard to attack. That's very common in mathematics where reformulating the problem can make the relevant bits and pieces more obvious while the original formulations obfuscated them. In the same way some NP-complete problems look harder to me because they seem to require global information while vertex three coloring looks to me like it should be solvable with quite localized information. Another good analogy is probably the way switching between position and momentum eigenstates in quantum physics makes different problems easier to express and handle.
