vania-janet/multiturn-rag-retrieval-data huggingface dataset:
Regardless of your belief in no name equals fake... what are your thoughts on the content of the article? The points that were brought up were relatable no? As a person who understands a lot about researching on social platforms, I would have thought you could have a good insight to share, to help the author and the reader in this thread?
Serve clean cold bottled water, maybe have a cooler.  Decorate your Tuk Tuk with eye-catching colors or designs.   Have maps of popular places to go in Angkor Wat.  Make sure people know how to find you — think about getting a facebook page, or use SEO to get high rankings when people search for “best tuk tuk angkor wat”  Give your customers business cards with your name, email address and a few benefits of your tuk tuk. If you speak good English, make sure the card says that. If you are always on time, say that. Etc.   Make your prices clear and fair.  Be positive and helpful with all of your customers.   Build great itineraries with a lot of interesting things and variety.
Yes, that's right, which is why you should get in on it quick, before it goes up even more.   Think about it, one Bitcoin now could buy you a house in about a decade. It'll be the only currency of value in just a few years.
Our elegant custom wire jewelry can be made into any word, so you aren't simply limited to names. Personalized name Jewelry makes a touching and thoughtful gift- for others or for yourself! Wire jewelry is designed to be passed down for generations to come, each piece is crafted by hand in San Diego, CA  While names are our most popular personalized gift which is handmade name necklace, there is a growing trend to have us create unique custom gifts that you won't find anywhere else. These are just some of the few concepts we've made into unforgettable keepsake jewelry. We can make custom jewelry from a picture or your imagination.  All handcrafted by Adriana Fine Jewelry are custom made in gold filled wire and sterling silver wire, silver custom bracelet, wire neck choker, personalized mothers jewelry, personalized anklet with birth stone, choker, neck wire.
Some banks give you an indemnity form that will allow them to clear the payment available in a different name. This is usually in case the name on the cheque is slightly misspelled. For example, color (American) could be spelt as colour (British). In India for example, names can often be spelt in multiple ways. the indeminity form is common place.
"There's a few layers to the Momentum Theory discussed in that book. But speaking in general terms I can answer the following: Kind of. Assuming you understand that historically the Nasdaq has seen a little more volatility than the S&P. And, more importantly, that it tends to track the tech sector more than the general economy.  Thus the pitfall is that it is heavily weighted towards (and often tracks) the performance of a few stocks including: Apple, Google (Alphabet), Microsoft, Amazon, Intel and Amgen.  It could be argued this is counter intuitive to the general strategy you are trying to employ. This could be tougher to justify.  The reason it is potentially not a great idea has less to do with the fact that gold has factors other than just risk on/off and inflation that affect its price (even though it does!); but more to do with the fact that it is harder to own gold and move in and out of positions efficiently than it is a bond index fund.   For example, consider buying physical gold.  To do so you have to spend some time evaluating the purchase, you are usually paying a slight premium above the spot price to purchase it, and you should usually also have some form of security or insurance for it.  So, it has additional costs.  Possibly worth it as part of a long-term investment strategy; if you believe gold will appreciate over a decade. But not so much if you are holding it for as little as a few weeks and constantly moving in and out of the position over the year. The same is true to some extent of investing in gold in the form of an ETF.  At least a portion of ""their gold"" comes from paper or futures contracts which must be rolled every month.  This creates a slight inefficiency.  While possibly not a deal breaker, it would not be as attractive to someone trading on momentum versus fundamentals in my opinion. In the end though, I think all strategies are adaptable.  And if you feel gold will be the big mover this year, and want to use it as your risk hedge, who am I or anyone else to tell you that you shouldn't."
"You sound like Mayor Bloomberg crying to Occupiers not to ""be so hard"" on the banks, because they're ""job creators"". If they're a crappy company, we don't need their crappy jobs.  Think of all the unfortunate hedge fund managers who lost their jobs in 2008.  Shed any tears for them?  I couldn't name you half a dozen people that would shed even one."
Another consideration is what the cure is actually worth. Prevention and awareness is already reducing the number of (wealthy) western people who have HIV and so the market size is falling where the most profit can be made. In order to get any return on your investment a profit will be required. Where HIV rates are rising is in poor countries in Africa, Asia, and south America where the price at which people could afford to buy a cure is likely to be lower than even the break even price for the firm. In this case you have a monopoly and a drug that works but no one can afford to buy it for a price that you can accept and still make a profit. Biotech is a very risky, but potentially lucrative, area because there are just so many risks at every stage. Price volatility occurs on rumour and questionable statements from the company (who are always trying to be positive so that their funding doesn't dry up) and even relatively small trades can move the market a large amount as few people want to sell an investment with so much potential. There are also some charged political positions with regard to HIV and AIDS, so a shift in political power could also derail a biotech firm that is researching this kind of drug.
I think he meant Oxford University in the UK, but he's wrong.   You can still pursue a career in Investment Banking even if you do not go to the aforementioned Ivy Leagues. As long as the university you are at is well-respected and you have few summer internships and leadership activities under your belt, it is possible but harder to break into!
I think Michigan has a few good technical schools that could feed Amazon. U of M being #1 in the state but Michigan State and Michigan Tech both produce a lot of good engineers.   And Detroit is on an up beat. I am from there originally and it was attracting a lot more young people/businesses. I live in Portland now and all my hipster friends say they have been hearing good things and a few were considering moving there.  And Quicken employees a huge IT team in Detroit Amazon could start trying to steal.  You might be right they are an unlikely candidate but I think they have a lot more going for it than you might think at first glance.
The idea being that if / when the CAD recovers I could see a gain of ~30%. That is the big if, maybe the USD and CAD will return to their previous exchange rates, maybe the CAD will fall further, you just don't know. You should try to keep a diversified pool of investments, that may include some cash in various currencies but unless you think you will need the money in the next few years it should probablly be mostly in other things. If you do think you will need the money in the next few years it should probablly be in a currency that is stable relative to the things you are likely to need it for.
Maybe the prices aren't better always but there's a perceived higher quality. When you shop there, it feels like you're getting a better value. Who can forget two buck Chuck? And lots of their goods are repackaged. It's an open secret that some of the goods you buy there is name brand with a new box. TJ cultivates this image of being the place where they stuff expensive food into a new box and sell it half off. Shopping there feels like winning the lottery.  They could only do this by limiting their variety. A shame that the article points it out as if a failing, like they pay employees more despite this. It's just the opposite.
I went there as a last resort for a few items a week ago. They had some promotion going on where spending so much money got you a $5 gift card. The thing expired a few days later. Sure, I could have looked on the card, but the ads for that and the cashier never mentioned this. And since when do giftcards expire?
I would delay purchase of a condo or apartment until you have at a minimum, 6 months of living expenses including mortgage set aside in other investments that could be liquidated.  If you lost your source of income though disability or layoff or an unexpected termination of a grant, you need to have that cushion or a significant other whose salary can sustain payments.   You could lose a lot if you either cannot make the payments and/or the value to the apartment dips greatly.  Many folks in the recent housing bubble and Great Recession learned this the hard way.  Many lost their entire investment by not being able to make payments AND seeing their house lose 1/3 of its value.
Incorrect. As a given product or service becomes more complex to manufacture or support, the cost of entry into that marketplace increases.   Any aspect of technology automatically tends towards increased barrier to entry even without regulation.  Increased barrier to entry requires larger investment, means more risk, means increased difficulty finding investment.  Consider computer processors - in the 80s, creating a processor that can compete in the fledgling marketplace against similarly available chips would cost maybe a few million.  Today, creating a processor thousands of times more complex, requiring much more complex chip fabs (of which there are a mere handful), and bringing it to market to compete against CPUs that already have the infrastructure and programming history to support them would be nearly impossible and require billions.  Or, you know, you could look at the whole Microsoft and Intel locking out their competition from PC manufacturers by means of economic incentives or disincentives, leading to a de-facto monopoly that they can then abuse to force PC manufacturers to deal on their terms, all possible without regulation.
Stop trying to make money with your emergency fund. It's purpose is to sit there idly waiting for a bad day. A day when you need that cash (liquid) not in a bank or a line-of-credit. The few dollars you might make trying to chase interest/investments with your emergency fund aren't worth it if a true emergency came up and you couldn't get to your cash in time. Once you have a fully funded EF then start investing heavily. That's your future game plan. Not the EF.
Necklaces are extra like a sign of class within the present iteration. Humans could have a lot of options and designs to prefer from jewelers and will have an opportunity to create their own design situated on the supply. It's certainly a excellent funding for folks to purchase any form of awesome name necklace, because it could aid you construct a fame and fetch extra money someday. Necklaces would on the whole be luxurious than any other pieces of jewelry, because the utilization of metallic would normally be high than other kinds.
"It really depends a lot on you and how much time you are putting into it. Since you're saying you want your money to work for you I'm going to assume you want as little hassle as possible. A few general tips: Save a fixed percentage of your monthly income Don't try to save ""whenever you have money left over"", you will just end up spending it somehow. Invest long term - don't trade Don't try to beat the market - it will just take up too much time and statistically you will end up making less. Hedge If you invest in the company/industry you work in, you will be double screwed if the sector drops (lose job + savings at the same time). Optimally you should invest in something that will benefit when the company you work for is doing bad. Pay off high interest debt Usually debt will have a higher interest than any safe investment you can make. Spend money to save/make money Sometimes the best investment you can make is on stuff that will save you money in the long run. Like buy an apartment close to work (less transport costs) or get a more expensive car that will save you money on gas, insurance etc."
"It surely doesn't HURT to keep a receipt. I tend to pile up receipts in my desk drawer, never look at them, and then every few months throw them all out. If a vendor writes a receipt by hand or if the cash register is not tied in to the credit card system, keeping a receipt could give you evidence against mistakes or fraud. Like if the vendor gives you a receipt for $10 and then sends a transaction to the credit card company for $20, you could use the receipt as evidence of the problem. But if the vendor is trying to really cheat you, the most likely thing for him to do is run the legitimate transaction through, and then some time later run a fake transaction. So say today you go to vendor X, buy something for $20, and he bills your credit card $20. Then a few days later he bills you another $100 even though you never came back to the store. Sure, you have a receipt for $20. But you don't have a receipt for the $100 because you never authorized that transaction. Your receipt proves nothing -- presumably you're not disputing the $20. If you complain to the bank or go to the police or whatever, saying, ""Hey look, I don't have a receipt for the $100"" doesn't prove anything. How do they know you didn't just throw it away? It's difficult to prove that you never had such a receipt."
Coincidentally, 10 year T-notes have the same 2% yield as the S&P dividends. If you're getting that on half your holdings, and nothing on the other half, you're netting 1% per year. Not great, but not totally lost. To illustrate the effect of rebalancing, use my example of a 70/30 stock/bond split. The S&P lost about 50% of its value from its peak to the bottom of the market in early 2008. If you only held stock, you would need the market to increase in value by 100% in order for you to recover that value. If 30% of your holdings are in bonds, and you rebalance at exactly the bottom of the stock market, you only need the stock index to increase in value by about 80% from the bottom in order to make you whole again. I mention those two to emphasize that your investment return is not just a function of the price of a stock index. Dollar cost average. It's rare that you will actually face the situation of putting (say) $100,000 into the market all at once, let it sit for 10-20 years, then take it all out at once. The situation you face is closer to putting about $1000 into the market every month for 100 months. If you do that, then you're getting a different price for each purchase you make. Your actual return will be a weighted average of the return from each of those purchases. But note that this could help or hurt you. Using the chart Victor showed in his answer, if your lost decade is from one peak to the next peak, your average price will be below the price you would have entered and left at. So this helps. But if your lost decade is from trough to trough, then your average price is higher than the start and end price, so this has hurt you. Those are the two extreme cases, and the general case will be somewhere in between. And you can use these regular purchases to help you carry out your regular rebalancing. Foreign equities. Since you mention the S&P500 specifically, I assume that you are in the United States. The US equities is approximately 45% of the world equities market.
At what point does my investment benefit from compounded interest? Monthly? Quarter? Yearly? Does it even benefit? I think you are mixing things. There is no concept of interest or compounding in Mutual Funds. When you buy a mutual fund, it either appreciates in value or depreciates in value; both can happen depending on the time period you compare. Now, let's assume at the end of the year I have a 5% return. My $10,000 is now $10,500. The way you need to look at this is Given you started with $10,000 and its now $10,500 the return is 5%. Now if you want to calculate simple return or compounded return, you would have to calculate accordingly. You may potentially want to find a compounded return for ease of comparison with say a Bank FD interest rate or some other reason.  So if $10,000 become $10,500 after one year and $11,000 after 2 year. The absolute return is 10%, the simple yearly return is 5%. Or the Simple rate of return for first year is 5% and for second year is 4.9%. Or the Average Year on Year return is 4.775%.
"The question that I walk away with is ""What is the cost of the downside protection?"" Disclaimer - I don't sell anything. I am not a fan of insurance as an investment, with rare exceptions. (I'll stop there, all else is a tangent) There's an appeal to looking at the distribution of stock returns. It looks a bit like a bell curve, with a median at 10% or so, and a standard deviation of 15 or so. This implies that there are some number of years on average that the market will be down, and others, about 2/3, up. Now, you wish to purchase a way of avoiding that negative return, and need to ask yourself what it's worth to do so.  The insurance company tells you (a) 2% off the top, i.e. no dividends and (b) we will clip the high end, over 9.5%.  I then am compelled to look at the numbers. Knowing that your product can't be bought and sold every year, it's appropriate to look at 10-yr rolling returns. The annual returns I see, and the return you'd have in any period. I start with 1900-2012. I see an average 9.8% with STD of 5.3%. Remember, the 10 year rolling will do a good job pushing the STD down. The return the Insurance would give you is an average 5.4%, with STD of .01. You've bought your way out of all risk, but at what cost?  From 1900-2012, my dollar grows to $30080, yours, to $406. For much of the time, treasuries were higher than your return. Much higher.  It's interesting to see how often the market is over 10% for the year, clip too many of those and you really lose out.  From 1900-2012, I count 31 negative years (ouch) but 64 years over 9.5%. The 31 averaged -13.5%, the 64, 25.3%.  The illusion of ""market gains"" is how this product is sold. Long term, they lag safe treasuries."
On the other hand, the log-returns for the same period are -0.69, 0.88, -0.88, 0.69, -1.6, 2, and the average log-return is about 0.068. If we used this as a proxy for the average percentage change in the price over the whole seven days, we would get 6.8% instead of 117%, which is wildly wrong. The reason why it is wrong is because the price fluctuated so much. On the other hand, the closing prices for United Marshmallow over the same period are 10, 11, 12, 11, 12, 13, 15. The average percentage change from day to day is 0.073, and the average log-return is 0.068, so in this case the log-return is very close to the percentage change. And it has the advantage of being computable from just the first and last prices, because the properties of logarithms imply that it simplifies to (log(15)-log(10))/6. Notice that this is exactly the same as for Pitchfork Oil. So one reason why you might be interested in the average log-return is that it gives a very quick way to estimate the average return, if the stock price is not changing very much. Another, more subtle reason, is that it actually behaves better than the percentage return. When the price of Pitchfork jumps from 5 to 12 and then crashes back to 5 again, the percentage changes are +140% and -58%, for an average of +82%. That sounds good, but if you had bought it at 5, and then sold it at 5, you would actually have made 0% on your money. The log-returns for the same period do not have this disturbing property, because they do add up to 0%. What's the real difference in this example? Well, if you had bought $1 worth of Pitchfork on Tuesday, when it was 5, and sold it on Wednesday, when it was 12, you would have made a profit of $1.40. If you had then bought another $1 on Wednesday and sold it on Thursday, you would have made a loss of $0.58. Overall, your profit would have been $0.82.
First, make sure you understand the objective of an ETF.  In some cases, they may use leverage to get a multiple of the index's return that is different than 1.  Some may be ultra funds that go for double the return or double the inverse of the return and thus will try to apply the appropriate leverage to achieve that return. Those that use physical replication can still have a small portion be used to try to minimize the tracking error as there is something to be said for what kind of tracking error do you accept as the fund's returns may differ from the index by some measure. Yes.  For example, if you were to have a fund that had a 50% and -50% return in back to back periods, what would your final return be?  Answer: -25%, which if you need to visualize this, take $1 that then becomes $1.50 by going up 50% and then becomes $.75 by going down 50% in a compounded fashion.  This is where you have to be careful of the risks of leverage as those returns will compound in a possibly negative way.
&gt;irrelevant language lawyer skipping the whole point.  Hon, you're the one who is likening the situation to utilities and to people dying. Those are irrelevant to the point of uselessness, which is why you're not getting anywhere in this thread. You haven't made a single coherent argument that is actually relevant to what's happening.  &gt;You're out of your element.  Ironic, coming from the person who didn't answer my long comment about credit card processing once I mentioned I work in the industry and put a lot of information..
You probably want the Internal Rate of Return (IRR), see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internal_rate_of_return which is the compound interest rate that would produce your return. You can compute it in a spreadsheet with XIRR(), I made an example: https://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=0AvuTW2HtDQfYdEsxVlM0RFdrRk1QS1hoNURxZkVFN3c&hl=en You can also use a financial calculator, or there are probably lots of web-based calculators such as the ones people have mentioned.
You will then need to recalculate how much you each own of the fund. Just before the injection, the fund was worth 950 in cash and 387 in stock (310 - 200 = 110 x 3.54) = 1.339 dollars - then 31 dollars are injected, bringing the value of the fund up to 1.370. The ownership of the fund is split with 1.339 / 1.370 = 97.8% of the value for the old capital and 2.2% for the new capital. If the value of the fund was to change from here, you could calculate the return for each investor individually by applying their share of the funds value respective to their investment. Because the value of the fund has not changed since the last period (bullet 3), the return on the original investment is (977 / 1.339 - 1 = 37.2%) and the return on the new capital is (31 / 31 = 0%). If you (and not someone else) injected the 31 dollar into the fund, you will need to calculate the weight of each share of capital in each period and get the average return for each period to get to a total return. In this specific case you will still get 37.2% return - but it gets even more comlex for each time you inject new capital.
"Not to state the obvious, but you realize this can only be done in hindsight? Sure, you can project out to get a range of expected return, but the tax laws can change every year, your own income changes so your marginal rate will change. You may have started with a 7% mortgage, and refinanced now to 4.5%, so you are far better off than the original plan. I'll repeat what others mentioned, for your own home, the rent you are ""not"" paying is most of your return. A $100K home may appreciate at whatever rate 3-5%, say. But the $800/mo rent you don't have to pay is $9600/yr, nearly 10%. So when you imply that a house merely rising with inflation is a zero real return, I'd suggest that's far from accurate, all other expenses taken into account of course."