It is river sediments and limestone. Only looks bad because of algae. Would only have to worry it had been used as a dump. But it was only ever used for a gravel quarry.
Edit: they are also pumping the water out and using it for dust control.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Tesla, TSLA & the Investment World: the Perpetual Investors' Roundtable
- Thread starter AudubonB
- Start date
It is river sediments and limestone. Only looks bad because of algae. Would only have to worry it had been used as a dump. But it was only ever used for a gravel quarry.
Edit: they are also pumping the water out and using it for dust control.
Don't give the shortz any ideas..
But they're throwing the ball to each other, handling it, seems one of the easiest ways to catch the virus if you ask me. This is why I was really, realties surprised that playing tennis was one of the first activities they allowed in CA after the shelter-in-place.
StealthP3D
Well-Known Member
I heard they sent in a special division of the Texas Rangers to exterminate them on the first day!
Too many spit balls.
He is probably trying to boost his "just folks" cred.
They're actually tossing the balls out whenever it's played by more than just the pitcher/catcher.
And it was neat to see Anthony Rizzo (Cubs 1B) this weekend offering hand sanitizer whenever an opponent reached base.
Interesting excerpt from this book:
One example within the book deals with separating noise and signal (meaning) within investing. Let’s say you have a dentist that can invest with a 15% average annual return with 10% annual volatility. For reference, the S&P 500 index has a ~10% average annual return and ~14% average annual volatility. The dentist has good thing going, with the portfolio doubling in value every 5 years on average.
An unexpected factor in his success is the frequency upon which he looks at his portfolio balance. Here’s a chart from the book showing the probability of a positive change in value based on how often the portfolio is checked.
If he were to check his portfolio every minute, he would only see a positive return 50.17% of the time. That is basically indiscernible from a coin flip. The problem is loss aversion.
Being emotional, he feels a pang with every loss, as it shows in red on his screen. He feels some pleasure when the performance is positive, but not in equivalent amount as the pain experienced when the performance is negative.
At the end of every day the dentist will be emotionally drained. A minute-by-minute examination of his performance means that each day (assuming eight hours per day) he will have 241 pleasurable minutes against 239 unpleasurable ones. These amount to 60,688 and 60,271, respectively, per year. Now realize that if the unpleasurable minute is worse in reverse pleasure than the pleasurable minute is in pleasure terms, then the dentist incurs a large deficit when examining his performance at a high frequency.
Again, this doesn’t go away even if you know about the phenomenon:
Regardless of what people claim, a negative pang is not offset by a positive one (some psychologists estimate the negative effect for an average loss to be up to 2.5 the magnitude of a positive one); it will lead to an emotional deficit.
Now, if he were to check that same portfolio only when his monthly statement arrives, he would see a positive return 67% of the time (2 out of 3). Finally, if he has the patience to check only once a year, she would see a positive return 93% of the time. The time scale matters.
Thought i'd share this with TMC......
One example within the book deals with separating noise and signal (meaning) within investing. Let’s say you have a dentist that can invest with a 15% average annual return with 10% annual volatility. For reference, the S&P 500 index has a ~10% average annual return and ~14% average annual volatility. The dentist has good thing going, with the portfolio doubling in value every 5 years on average.
An unexpected factor in his success is the frequency upon which he looks at his portfolio balance. Here’s a chart from the book showing the probability of a positive change in value based on how often the portfolio is checked.
If he were to check his portfolio every minute, he would only see a positive return 50.17% of the time. That is basically indiscernible from a coin flip. The problem is loss aversion.
Being emotional, he feels a pang with every loss, as it shows in red on his screen. He feels some pleasure when the performance is positive, but not in equivalent amount as the pain experienced when the performance is negative.
At the end of every day the dentist will be emotionally drained. A minute-by-minute examination of his performance means that each day (assuming eight hours per day) he will have 241 pleasurable minutes against 239 unpleasurable ones. These amount to 60,688 and 60,271, respectively, per year. Now realize that if the unpleasurable minute is worse in reverse pleasure than the pleasurable minute is in pleasure terms, then the dentist incurs a large deficit when examining his performance at a high frequency.
Again, this doesn’t go away even if you know about the phenomenon:
Regardless of what people claim, a negative pang is not offset by a positive one (some psychologists estimate the negative effect for an average loss to be up to 2.5 the magnitude of a positive one); it will lead to an emotional deficit.
Now, if he were to check that same portfolio only when his monthly statement arrives, he would see a positive return 67% of the time (2 out of 3). Finally, if he has the patience to check only once a year, she would see a positive return 93% of the time. The time scale matters.
Thought i'd share this with TMC......
TheTalkingMule
Distributed Energy Enthusiast
Kinda surprised to see low-ish volume today. I assumed a decent amount of forced covering would mean a lot of manipulation and buying action. A slow burn all week perhaps.
LN1_Casey
Draco dormiens nunquam titillandus
They'll drive them out with AK-47's and double barrel shotguns.
Anyone want to buy a July 31st $2500 call? Low mileage, original owner. Paid $876, will sell for $500 firm. May consider parting out.
I have found that big up days are a big drain on my energy. Not at all fun, to be honest. This is a bit of a head-scratcher. More money is more fun, right?
Perhaps on big up days, I check the price very often. Even on big up days, the quote is a down-tick only slightly less than an up-tick.
On a big down day, I can just tune it all out and not check the ticker. So big down days are, perversely, more enjoyable for me.
Curbside pickup?
With a .174 batting average this year Tesla might be better served by the Red Sox or Dodgers.I heard they sent in a special division of the Texas Rangers to exterminate them on the first day!
Last edited:
Will Giga Berlin produce Roadrunner cells? "Completely new technology" according to state of Brandenburg Minister for Economics and Energy:
https://twitter.com/DerCaspar/status/1287769303715057667
https://twitter.com/DerCaspar/status/1287769303715057667
TheTalkingMule
Distributed Energy Enthusiast
That's to be expected for a normal day. This is a Monday after absurdly positive 2Q earnings and a massive SP smashdown.
Interesting excerpt from this book:
One example within the book deals with separating noise and signal (meaning) within investing. Let’s say you have a dentist that can invest with a 15% average annual return with 10% annual volatility. For reference, the S&P 500 index has a ~10% average annual return and ~14% average annual volatility. The dentist has good thing going, with the portfolio doubling in value every 5 years on average.
An unexpected factor in his success is the frequency upon which he looks at his portfolio balance. Here’s a chart from the book showing the probability of a positive change in value based on how often the portfolio is checked.
If he were to check his portfolio every minute, he would only see a positive return 50.17% of the time. That is basically indiscernible from a coin flip. The problem is loss aversion.
Being emotional, he feels a pang with every loss, as it shows in red on his screen. He feels some pleasure when the performance is positive, but not in equivalent amount as the pain experienced when the performance is negative.
At the end of every day the dentist will be emotionally drained. A minute-by-minute examination of his performance means that each day (assuming eight hours per day) he will have 241 pleasurable minutes against 239 unpleasurable ones. These amount to 60,688 and 60,271, respectively, per year. Now realize that if the unpleasurable minute is worse in reverse pleasure than the pleasurable minute is in pleasure terms, then the dentist incurs a large deficit when examining his performance at a high frequency.
Again, this doesn’t go away even if you know about the phenomenon:
Regardless of what people claim, a negative pang is not offset by a positive one (some psychologists estimate the negative effect for an average loss to be up to 2.5 the magnitude of a positive one); it will lead to an emotional deficit.
Now, if he were to check that same portfolio only when his monthly statement arrives, he would see a positive return 67% of the time (2 out of 3). Finally, if he has the patience to check only once a year, she would see a positive return 93% of the time. The time scale matters.
Thought i'd share this with TMC......
This is awesome. But we're skipping an important element ... the entertainment factor of checking frequently
JusRelax
Active Member
Exactly -- this would be compeltely normal if Thursday/Friday SP movement didn't happen and Tesla didn't crush their earnings report.
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
