hsk

Rules are decided by each state on its own. You can blame the constitution for deferring election procedures to each state.

In PA, for example, the legislature (which is GOP I might add) forbid counting mail-in ballots until election day. That basically guarantees delays.

Have you been around for Gore vs Bush? I'm not sure why you're claiming this is one of the worst elections. Most close elections aren't called on election day. Almost every state continues counting past election day. It's just you're only hearing about the ones that are close.

Each state's legislature decides that, so naturally states will differ on deadlines for when mail can arrive. Also, the count dragging on is because counting hasn't finished on the sheer quantity of mail-in ballots received before election day, not after (which are insignificant in number).

Because while matter cannot move faster than the speed of light the universe itself is allowed to expand faster than the speed of light. Think of the spacetime fabric stretching so fast light cannot cover the increased distance. The universe is essentially creating more distance between objects.

Another way to think of it is velocity of an object is derivative of position in space over time. If space itself is moving your position relative to it isn't changing.

That's not the right way to look at it.

People invest in an IPO in the first place because of the promise of liquidity down the line.

If investors were told that they couldn't freely buy or sell shares after the first time it is sold, the IPO is going to do far worse.

The ability to trade the stock around directly helps the company by making the IPO more successful.

That's not even considering that the company could issue secondary offerings.

I haven't read the documentation, but I can respond to your questions given what you quoted.

1) It seems that way. Presumably, they will require affiliates to follow stricter rules. Even so, you would expect that these affiliates would try their hardest to take advantage of their speed advantage.

2) Pegged orders are essentially orders that the exchange manages for you. For example, if you peg an order at the inside bid, your order will follow the market as it moves around. Essentially, these orders will react with close to zero latency since the exchange itself is modifying them. It's unclear how these orders will be used to game the market, since their logic is so simple and predefined by the exchange.

In terms of time frame, it's just the evolution of technology. For example, processors are clocked in nanoseconds. When your limiting reagent is how quickly you can update based on changes in the world, you need lower latencies. That's one of the aspects of the system that IEX tries to solve, by adding a giant delay to everyone's orders, so that the jitter swallows any small advantage.

One of the concerns of changing the rules, however, is that once smart people start using the system, they will eventually find some new way to game it, landing us not far from where we started.

You're overestimating the effectiveness of computers in taking in data and finding patterns. If you throw data naively at an algorithm, you'll get garbage. It's especially difficult to make sense out of trading data because of the sheer size and percentage of noise.

For any given trading strategy, a ton of thought, testing, and domain knowledge goes into creating the algorithm. It is not a black box that writes itself.

That said, computers are far more effective at certain tasks, especially latency sensitive simple calculations, just as calculators are far better at doing arithmetic.

Because whether the spin is up or down when you observe it is completely random. Both observers at either end would believe they looked at it first without any other information, and the stream of bits would be completely random AND 100% correlated with other.

One aspect of inflation is that it is a tax on people who choose to hoard their money. Because inflation naturally makes every dollar worth less and less over time, you are forced to either spend it now or invest it somewhere that grows with inflation. As a result, money is actually utilized instead of sitting in a bank account.

Thus, I think the idea that a dollar saved today can buy roughly the same amount of stuff in a decade is actually bad, because in a world where that's likely, that dollar was probably sitting useless in someone's purse for a decade.

Inflation, in my opinion, actually does the opposite of what you suggest -- because it encourages lending and investing in order to beat inflation, money is actually put to use for longer term projects such as infrastructure that can last years and years.

Everything has a gravitational field, but gravity is extremely weak, so you never notice it.

Just imagine how a tiny fridge magnet can overcome the gravitational pull of the entire Earth. Scale down the Earth to the size of ordinary objects and you can get an idea of how weak gravity is.

Correct. A safe observer far from the black hole will observe a singularity at the event horizon, but that is a coordinate singularity, not a true one. There is singularity at the event horizon for a falling observer. A falling observer will pass through the event horizon and reach the center, which is a true singularity that physics currently cannot explain.

To be fair, in SC1, maps played a HUGE role in balance. On Blue Storm, for example, Zergs used to have a multiple percentage point advantage over Terrans, but the map makers fixed that by adding a little space behind the minerals on the natural, making it a little bit easier to defend against Muta harass and thereby curbing the advantage.

I think that's missing the point again. The point of a patent is so that the underlying technology is public. A patent system in fact does exactly what you suggest, which is to create a monopoly for a certain period of time so that the inventor can profit. But the existence of a patent implies that the formula for the cancer drug is out, and so other companies can use that to potentially create better versions or apply it to other areas.

I think that's still not the point. A popular website's trade secret is not necessarily its source code. You can copy facebook's code from soup to nuts but you are not going to be nearly as successful.

On the other hand, imagine someone found out a way to cure cancer. If he just releases his formula, then there's a very good chance that he will not make any money off of it at all. Without patent protection, he will probably hoard the discovery for years while building a company of his own to sell the drug. Finally, the drugs will be available, and yet the public will still have no knowledge of how to develop the drug, improve it even further, or apply it to other diseases.

I'm not personally a big fan of patents. I'm merely addressing your comments, which I see to be somewhat irrelevant.

His point is that without the system of patents, inventors would never reveal anything to the public.

The target particles in quantum teleportation are sort of a canvas on which to paint the properties of the original particles. After teleportation, the two entities will be indistinguishable.

However, I do not think it means you are the same person. Currently, quantum teleportation destroys the original copy. For the sake of philosophical argument, suppose it did not. Then that new person would be conscious independent of you. Clearly, you are not that person.

Now imagine your particles becoming destroyed. You are dead. He is alive. He is not you, even though it would be impossible to tell that he was not you.