Did you read the actual page? It says on the banks FAQ that "You can now get a fixed-rate mortgage with a maturity of up to 10 years, where the nominal interest rate is negative.". So the opposite of what you said.
I can't find all the fine details on this loan, but there are definitely loans that stop you from prepayment, or at least have a penalty associated with them. These penalties can be pretty large and definitely are a reason not to pay back the entire mortgage before 10 years. In this exceptional case I'm assuming there is a prepayment penalty for a large portion of that 10 year fixed rate period.
I think the writer has confused themselves while attempting to simplify some of these concepts. Instead they should have accepted the financial market is complicated and cannot be condensed into a single blog post.
A few things to consider. If he had turned up to all of those flights there is the exact same financial situation for the airline as if he cancels at the very last moment, so him cancelling or not showing up is not an issue. The airline didn't complain that he booked too many flights. What would be an issue is if he double-booked flights, so there would be one he couldn't turn up to at all, this would be screwing the airline and bad faith. If he had done this he would have to know he would be inconveniencing the airline. The court case didn't bring this up and I would presume if they're willing to pull out specifics like the aforementioned cancellations, then they would jump at showing he double-booked flights. This leads me to believe he never did this, so he always intended to take the flights or at least wanted the opportunity available for him to take them, which really you should be able to with an unlimited ticket like that.
The evidence is against you. Rich people don't just wack money in the holy index fund of stable returns. Investing in properties is more complicated than buying, waiting, and flipping. With 2 million dollars cash you could probably buy 7 or 8 apartments (leverage is pretty useful), you would rent these out and hope they appreciate, or depreciate by less than the income from rent. It's a very reasonable investment, it just takes capital to begin with, the risk is lower than you think because as I mentioned, you can rent the property which hedges against depreciation. And even in the case of depreciation it can be favourable for tax purposes, you make money through renting and you reduce your taxable income through selling for a loss, it's still a net positive investment.
The index fund is the greatest thing to ever happen to casual investors, but with millions of dollars at your disposal you should no longer consider yourself part of that group. They're also not infallible, in the long run they're up but in the short run you can lose a lot of money in them, just like any investment.
I think you can post without a big ego, there are tutorials or articles that you can't feel the ego in, but this just wasn't one of them. And yes, a sense of self importance (not an enormously inflated one though) would be necessary to take care of yourself in my opinion.
I would disagree. With a net worth in the millions (but still under 10) you should consider investing in property and perhaps even art. These are things middle class workers are not looking into as much. Index funds can't match the potential returns that being a property investor does. It also allows you to turn your wealth into an asset that can be leveraged for further investment. Stocks are how you keep your wealth steadily increasing instead of stagnating, property is how you turn that 5 million into 20. Money managers will help you with this, even getting a trusted real estate agent that is your go-to would be helpful.
You clearly didn't have fuck-you money. You could only quit your job for 2 years before presumably having to come back to work. I don't mean that in a rude way, it's just clear.
Your last sentence is a little confusing, if you're implying you could use your human capital and work, you're clearly going to be beholden to other people, and can't say fuck you to "any job, any time". In addition to that, we're back to the idea that 50k a year is fuck-you money, which it's not.
Long tangent incoming.
Fuck-you money is getting confused with a comfortable level of money. Most people will never ever get close to fuck-you money. Fuck-you money is black cards and reservations almost anywhere because you tip ludicrous amounts. It's being told the plane is full so you just upgrade to first class (if you weren't in there to begin with). It's being able to turn down any job because you could easily live at the same comfort level without it. It's only working because the work brings in stupid amounts more cash (that you probably can't figure out where to spend) or it offers you more than that (influence, stimulation). Just being able to say no to a job is not the same as that.
With that sort of thinking in mind no one would make any failsafes. "It's fucked anyway" is a constrictive and dangerous way of designing things, and likely to introduce even more failure points.
Interesting writeup, but I find in a lot of these "millionaire by age X" stories the ego is far bigger than the bank account. It's nice to think a 500k income is fuck-you money but it's not, you're still beholden to a lot of people. If you have to stress about money (claiming being rich is a full-time job sounds like stressing), you don't have fuck-you money.
I'm not talking down to writer, but having a proper money manager (not the same as a stock broker) would alleviate a lot of the downsides of being rich that he listed. Fortunately managers that used to only take enormously wealthy clients are branching into lower wealth ones, so it's easier than ever to get sound investment advice.
Not sure there's anything of great substance to take away from it.
You're not alone in this, I believe it's the lowest rated item on the apple store (2 stars) and the vast majority of reviews are single stars. It's rubbish.
The N95 and the iphone both sucked for web browsing. Websites just weren't made for small screens, you had to zoom in so far and links were hard to click. I wouldn't say the iPhone's browsing experience was any better than the rest, but perhaps that unlimited data plan (not bandwidth) changed things up.
Player tagging is more complicated than a single game, and goes far deeper than playing a few hands one way and then switching it up. You can have player stats based on thousands of hands, you can know things about your opponent even they don't know.
I don't think you play very much, which is fine, but makes this discussion a bit pointless.
Well in online poker high level players make great use of player tagging, taking notes about players they have played before and what they've done in important hands or their patterns. Software exists to track how opponents behave in any given situation, and if it pops up again you use that.
I would think if professional players are utilising this information, a bot could benefit from it. I don't see how they would ever lose out from this information, even if it only uses situations where the opponent has a history of 100% of the time responding a certain way.
I am impressed by the bot but I have to laugh a bit because years ago I joked with a friend about making an "amnesiac bot" that had no recollection of previous hands, it seemed so useless we obviously didn't make it, we've evidently been proven wrong. (pointless tangent there)
But ICM is only a model that helps you evaluate information in the tournament, players will use it often to cap their bets or as a tipping point on a call, but I've never seen it used as a complete basis of play.
The same argument of money being on the line applies to the detection. Poker software is already pretty damn impressive with its tracking. The online casinos actually stand to lose more money than the bot creators could make, so the detection has a greater incentive, and is likely to triumph.
You are aware there are many slime instagram accounts and channels that involve nothing but footage of their hands manipulating slime? I'm not sure what part of that involves being young and attractive.
Though of those linked it appears 2 of the 3 applications are essentially refurbishing or replacing screens in existing systems. The only application that seems "new" is the CRT HuD which I don't believe is going anywhere soon.
Once the displays in older machines are replaced with LCDs (as in new machines won't include them) I assume the only application will be that HuD.
Presumably even if they don't intend to use the tld for lots of sites (perhaps stores could have subdomains) they'll be using the tld as a way of proving authenticity. Only they can create links with .amazon so they can assure customers of their safety from phishing etc.
We are in the comment section of a niche tech forum though. Our views and those of the people we associate with will be far more critical of technology than the public, so I wouldn't make such grand statements as Windows == bluescreens and ransomware. Sure it has them, but it's far more associated with computers in general, which people need to do their work and daily activities.
Fair enough, but do be careful of founder revisionist history. Independent research is usually better at digging up company origins than the "tales from the inside" that founders tout. (Though I'm not disputing the revenue split advantage)
If you read Battle of the Titans, you'll see Android was left to its own devices once acquired, so you could say it was a team that what would eventually build the Android we know, regardless of who bought it. Google contributed cash but didn't do anything Microsoft couldn't if they had acquired them.
Perhaps all the lawsuits (or I guess one lawsuit that has been going on for more than a decade with all the appeals). At this point I'm sure it would have been cheaper to acquire Sun than to drag this out and still potentially face fines in the billions.