Y2HH

QUOTE (iamshack @ May 15, 2013 -> 01:40 PM) I'm envisioning Y2H dancing to Daft Punk's new single right now... I do like Daft Punk. Their Tron/Legacy soundtrack was amazing.

QUOTE (chw42 @ May 15, 2013 -> 01:32 PM) Heh, maybe you're just too old to like any new music. I have a lot of new music. Like I said, it finds me, I don't go seeking it out by listening to a ton of crap.

QUOTE (chw42 @ May 15, 2013 -> 01:32 PM) The HTC One actually acts a lot like a Nexus device. The bootloader can be unlocked through HTC-dev and there's already CM builds for it due to that. And CM builds are not dumpy. Stock Android is nice and stable, but there are customization options it lacks that I cannot live without. That's where custom ROMs come into play. Paranoid Android is actually developing Facebook chat heads for all notifications, allowing for overlay multi-tasking. It's pretty damn impressive. I'm also fairly sure there will be 100% stock AOSP builds for the One in the future. CM builds are dumpy. They're not very stable. IMO, that's an immediate no go.

QUOTE (chw42 @ May 15, 2013 -> 01:21 PM) 4.3 will be out before that I think. They haven't mentioned it yet, so maybe that was a false rumor. If 5.0 does get released, it will be with the next Nexus later this year. Google's streaming service is already live, along with a new Google Play Music app. I'm already using it. It's slightly cheaper than Spotify on mobile, so that's good. I don't know if I'd pay $7 a month to play all my music on mobile though. These services are specific to a certain set of people. I'd never pay to stream music, not from anyone...I just don't see the need. Certain people seem to have this *need* to find new music, when I'm perfectly happy with the quite-wide variety/collection of music I have now. I don't really need to "find" new music, especially if it means I have to listen to 50 bustout songs to find a good one that I "may" like. Music I like eventually makes it's way to me, just as it always has. I have about 10,000 songs in my collection, weighing in at almost 60 gigs. I have enough music to listen too for the rest of my life without worrying about growing tired of it, either.

QUOTE (chw42 @ May 15, 2013 -> 01:19 PM) I had the same thought process. I'd totally buy an HTC One if it ran stock Android. That phone is sexy. The One is the first Android phone I'm considering...and if it had the option to run stock Android, without having to hack it with some dumpy ass Cyanogen mod, I'd buy it tomorrow.

QUOTE (chw42 @ May 14, 2013 -> 01:27 PM) So Google I/O is tomorrow. I really wonder Android 4.3 will be like. Lots of talk about unified messaging and a dedicated game-center where your saves sync across all your devices. But I'm fairly sure there will be more. I think the next Android is v5.

QUOTE (chw42 @ May 15, 2013 -> 11:55 AM) Google and Samsung are going to release a Galaxy S4 that runs stock Android. Never thought I'd see that happen. It's going to be sold on the Google Play Store, but $650... They need to do this with the HTC One. The S4, while spec bumped in pretty much every regard, isn't a very good phone IMO. The One makes it look dumpy. Also, need to open it on Sprint/Verizon.

It wasn't ok if/when the Bush administration did things that weren't legal, or questionable at best, and it's not ok when the Obama administration does it, either. Anyone defending either are the problem this country faces. Stupid people electing bad leaders, and then defending their bad decisions and blaming everyone else for everything.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ May 8, 2013 -> 10:59 AM) I can't remember where we were talking about internet recently, but I'll post it here anyway. I'm debating whether to change my internet provider. Right now I get my internet through AT&T U-Verse. Cable is through DirecTV so no bundling of services needed. My plan is up to 12 mbps for $57 a month, including the modem rental fee. It looks like Comcast I can get the "Performance" plan which is speeds up to 25mbps for $29.99 for 6 months and 49.99 thereafter (plus 7 a month for a rental fee)...so an average of $47. Seems like a no brainer but a couple of questions: (1) How do people like comcast internet, and specifically the 25mbs speed (since I know that's a bulls*** marketing number and the actual speed is much lower). Any outage problems or bandwidth throttles? I don't do torrents, just web browsing and lots of movie/tv show streaming and occasional gaming. (2) Does the modem you have come with a built in wi-fi router? That's a benefit of the AT&T system, but for $10/month savings I could go buy a wireless router and still come out ahead probably. This is always going to come down to the specific person/area, but I've had Comcast internet for years, and have had a total of two short outages over that time. I do WiFi for everything in my house, and my Internet is blazing. And no, Comcast's speeds are real. If you buy a 25mbit tier, you will actually get that. Here is a speedtest from me to a server in San Jose, CA. When downloading from something that can actually keep up with me, say a Newsgroup, I will sustain 6-7 megabytes per second throughout. With Comcast you can rent a modem with wifi, or without, that's up to you. Or, you can alternatively purchase a cable modem and you won't have to pay rental fees.

QUOTE (bmags @ May 7, 2013 -> 09:17 AM) I saw your tip in the tech thread on that, it's really good advice. Joel Greenblatt harps on that a lot in his douchey titled books. I just need to keep my eyes open like that and practice. I'm still going through basic stuff like Benjamin Graham's how to interpret financial statements. Any reading material you suggest that helped you? Not really, I didn't read up in books because you'll get one book that says X, and another says the complete opposite of X. I invest a lot like Graham or Buffet. I tend to look at a financial statement, see how much profit they turn, what their profit margin is, and how much debt they have vs how much cash they have on hand. Are they paying a dividend? If so, is it sustainable based on how much money they're making? Relatively simple things like this. If you see a company losing money, but paying a huge dividend, something is going to give on that, eventually. I invest in a very boring, practical way. There is no magic to what I do. I simply look for solid companies that people are bored with, or punishing for no reason. I also tend to buy/hold long term.

QUOTE (G&T @ May 6, 2013 -> 08:48 PM) Not really. There are go to arguments for defense attorneys but most cases settle early on if the cops do their jobs. The problem comes when a good defense attorney convinces a jury that field sobriety tests are harder than they look. Wait. I should go back a second. The difficulty isn't getting a conviction, it's establishing BAC. If a curve argument is in play then prosecution becomes a major challenge. That's because they are. Most people can't pass them sober.

QUOTE (bmags @ May 6, 2013 -> 03:01 PM) Thanks for the tip. I'm just not very confident in my judgment on individual stocks at this point, though it's not like I'm playing with large sums. I probably need to mock follow some stocks I like to test some of my insights before I do. The money I'm investing in the index funds is long-term so I'm not too concerned, but was hoping I would not be adding it in during record highs constantly. It's easiest to start with what you know, even if you don't know you know it. Think about a few things in your life you cannot live without, and look into the various companies that make those products. For a quick example, I'd guess that 40% if what's in your refrigerator is made by ConAgra. The answers for investing are all around us, and people simply don't notice it. Take iPhones and Androids, what compromises them? I invested a few hundred shares of Corning, who make gorilla glass. Why? Because I know phones, tablets, etc. All of them use gorilla glass. Corning was trading around 12 for the longest time and in the past few weeks has started to get noticed. It's at almost 15 now and pays a dividend. These are the types of stocks I look for. Who makes something everyone used but nobody seems to have noticed yet? From food to electronics, someone's makes every little detail that goes into it.

Sorry to hear this, Tex. I seem to hear it way too much. Why does the drunk driver always seem to walk away alive and the victims die?!

QUOTE (bmags @ May 6, 2013 -> 12:48 PM) I really thought q1 reports would be a good time to invest, not so sure now. There are always bargains to be had in the stock market, finding them is sometimes the hard part. Right now, aluminum and natural gas are good places to look, because nobody wants anything to do with either. The idea is to buy them before they do again.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ May 5, 2013 -> 04:03 PM) The finale for The Americans was awesome. Great first season. BS, I've finished watching Seasons 1-4 of Breaking Bad. You were right. Awesome. And Y2HH doesn't tell people they were right easily.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Apr 26, 2013 -> 09:54 AM) I think you missed the point. the SP shouldn't be your only investment. I love it as your stock investment. Your retirement should be well rounded and fairly conservative. Keep in mind that things like "one in a hundred year happens" are things that will probably happen once in your lifetime. I misconstrued that somewhat, but still disagree for the most part. I'm not a fan of the bond market, never have been, though for FULL disclosure, I do put 5% of my 401k allocation into bonds. I think the S&P500, in and of itself, is diversified enough that it doesn't matter to diversify more. I'm of the belief that if the stock market crashes and burns, bonds won't matter, either. There is no safe haven from that scenario. The S&P is THE representation of the US Economy as a whole (it's the ultimate US bellweather indicator), and if it falls to almost nothing...so did the entire US economy along with it, and in that scenario, bonds are just as worthless. My current 401k allocation (@37 years of age): 70% S&P 500 Index (0.10% cost basis) 25% International Fund (0.64% cost basis), this cost basis bothers me, but it's the only international stock fund available in my 401k plan, and I don't want to ignore emerging markets 5% Core Bond Index (0.27% cost basis) When I hit 50-55, those will begin changing, but I see no reason to do so in the near term. I then have a self directed IRA that has rollover money from past jobs, in which I invest in individual stocks, stocks like Pfizer, Coke-a-cola, Microsoft, Merck, Verizon, etc. You can safely say I'm "all in" on the stock market, because as stated above, I truly believe if it falls, everything is going to fall along with it.

QUOTE (Tuna @ Apr 26, 2013 -> 09:26 AM) Is anyone else investing in real estate? If so, where are you getting your properties from? Not I, since I don't know much about the industry. I believe Rock knows quite a bit about it, though. Speaking as a laymen when it comes to that, it seems like it would be the right time to do so, though.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Apr 25, 2013 -> 12:03 PM) (This one blew up while I wasn't around, but getting Y2 and 2K arguing about investment strategies produced some interesting results, btw). What exactly did you find interesting about it? I feel 2K is way over the top conservative, and believes there is more risk in the S&P 500 Index than I believe there is, to the point he calls it gambling. I think the beauty of the S&P is that it never under performs the market, and is diversified in and of itself, as it represents only the top 500 stocks. I don't disagree that you should begin moving money out of it (and other stocks) as you near retirement, into cash or ultra safe investments, but the idea that you should be doing it for every year you are closer to retirement is absurd to me, and merely moves money into dead investments way too prematurely, that could have otherwise been compounding over the years. If you plan on retiring at 65, when you hit 50-55, you can start moving money into conservative investments IF you are selling at near highs. If not, you have 10-15 years to wait for the S&P to rebound to begin the selling spree, and when the market rebounds, the S&P will NEVER miss the rebound. Since it's inception, the S&P 500 has NEVER taken longer than 10 years to rebound back to it's previous highs. Not once. Is there always a first time? I don't think there is for this, since it automatically re-balances itself into the top 500 stocks over and over again, so it will always ride the top of the market. And if the doomsday scenario does strike, and the market crashes and stays crashed, frankly, it doesn't matter what you were invested in, be it bonds, or straight cash at that point, it's over.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Apr 25, 2013 -> 09:21 AM) Thats the thing, so many things can go wrong so you have to assume nothing until closing. Inspection is one thing that can throw a deal apart, little bit of water damage or an almost dead water heater and things get interesting. Yea, I remember going through this myself, selling into a bad market and buying from a bad market (in 2009), contingent on one selling in order for the buy to go through. Talk about a huge pain in the ass. I recall having issues with the person buying our old house, wanting all this stuff fixed (and some of it needed it), and I was like hmmm, well, I'll tell you what, I'll knock 500$ off the house and that's that. If that's unacceptable, the deal is off. Needless to say, they accepted. Moved from Des Plaines to Clearing (Chicago). I really like the house I have now, and getting certain things fixed/replaced has been a pain in the ass, but I'm glad it's out of the way, and I won't have to worry about it for the foreseeable future. I love living in the city, without living too close to downtown.

QUOTE (illinilaw08 @ Apr 25, 2013 -> 12:46 PM) What's the point of saving money when interest rates are 0? I agree with you that people should show greater patience with large purchases (wife and I bought a house a couple years back and still haven't filled some of the rooms with furniture - making one big purchase a year), but that's not the overarching point. For instance, take student loans. I'm about to pay off my car (hooray!) and losing that monthly payment could certainly be used to bolster my savings. But why would I do that? That money is much more effectively used to pay down student loan debt at 4-6% interest than to sit in a savings account paying .02% interest. The current state of the economy penalizes savers. And it penalizes people that can't afford to get into the market. So you have some when you need it? If you have debt, savings don't make much sense. Pay down the debt first, THEN save.

From my own observation, although anecdotal, I think it's one of the biggest contributors to peoples lack of savings, it's that they have no patience...for anything. For example, I let my wife redo our living room this year...something she wanted to do LAST year. New carpet, furniture, etc. She had to wait until this year to do it. Most people would simply say, ok, I'll borrow the money now and pay it off when I get that money we were planning on using for this project next year, after all, they're offering 0% for 12 months, and by then it'll be paid back! The issue here is, this plan leaves no contingency in case other expenses come up, and they almost ALWAYS do. We waited until we had the cash, on hand, to have this done. And now it's done, and it's 100% paid for. Most people wouldn't have waited. They'd have borrowed to do it last year, and then something else would have come up...but the point is, the money they had originally earmarked for that project would have been spent on something else along the way, leading to a deficit, leading to debt. I see this allllllll the time. Have some patience and WAIT until you can afford something.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Apr 25, 2013 -> 11:03 AM) 2.5 years for men, 5 years for women overall. Which, again, were anticipated when the program was created. They weren't stupid and knew about the trends in increasing adult life expectancy. The Greenspan Commission in the 1980's knew this as well when they overhauled SS and set up the trust fund. The bottom half, though, with their flat-lined life expectancy, likely hasn't seen any growth at all since the 40's or 50's. Either way, it's pointless to look at life expectancy from birth in the 30's. The comparison needs to be done based on "years collecting retirement benefits." It's not just about the years, but the sheer number of people living longer is far greater.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Apr 25, 2013 -> 10:56 AM) Life expectancy at 65 has only increased a few years since the 40's and was expected to do so when the program was designed. http://www.ssa.gov/history/lifeexpect.html I think those are pretty significant gains.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Apr 25, 2013 -> 10:51 AM) Checked out my T-Mobile bill to see the new plans, and they are actually cheaper. Then looked into it some more. I've completely reversed my decision. http://www.slate.com/articles/business/mon...s_good_for.html If T-Mobile or one of the other cheaper carriers had the coverage I needed, I would go with them in a heartbeat. But their out of city coverage just doesn't exist. Hell, from the people I know that have Sprint, their IN city coverage isn't all that spectacular, either.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Apr 25, 2013 -> 10:43 AM) First, the increase in average lifespan has bifurcated based on class: So the people who rely the most on SS and Medicade are not really living longer, which is what makes the calls for increased retirement ages so callous and stupid. Increased financial education is definitely important, but so is just having some income. It seems like the $30k level would provide sufficient base income for a modest living. If you're talking about an overall Malthusian resource scarcity, sure, I think the whole house of cards will probably collapse within a hundred years. If you're talking about wealth scarcity, no, there's plenty of that, it's just been increasingly horded by a select few in recent decades. Even the lower income workers are showing 80's...that's the point. When SS began, they were in the late 50's.