Powered by glolg
Display Preferences Most Recent Entries Chatterbox Blog Links Site Statistics Category Tags About Me, Myself and Gilbert XML RSS Feed
Saturday, Dec 07, 2013 - 23:03 SGT
Posted By: Gilbert

Learning The Hard Way

My latest hair-tearing C++ mystery occured at the end of a function - all's right with an exit statement just before the closing brace, but try to exit right after the call in the calling function, and it crashes. It took some time before I realised that I had tried to write one element too far for a vector object. This sort of thing never happens in Perl.


From Painful Experience

Me: Mr. Ham, it's terrible! I just got word that Mr. Robo has wound up in hospital!

Mr. Ham: Is that right? The poor thing.

Me: And somehow, I have a funny feeling that you might be aware of more details.

Mr. Ham: Hmm? Why? All I know is that he ran into some temporary cashflow problems, nothing to make a fuss about.

Me: Weren't you the one who cleaned him out last week?

Mr. Ham: *firmly* Young 'uns, they got no financial discipline at all nowadays. *shakes head disapprovingly* You'd think that they would have enough foresight to stash a bit away under the mattress, or in a biscuit tin, for these rainy days - I know, because I checked. No, it seems that they keep everything in the bank. Tsk. Not only that, they squeal their PIN numbers so easily too. A shame. What this spendthrift generation is coming to, I don't want to know *sighs deeply*

Me: ...but what does that have to do with his accident?

Mr. Ham: So, our little profilgate approaches me for a loan, and it was with a heavy heart that I had to turn him down. I mean, he'll never pick up the virtue of saving if I keep bailing him out, right? Next thing you know, he'll be pleading "special needs". I can assure you, it hurt me far more than it hurt him. He then had the temerity to claim that he was starving, which simply doesn't happen in Singapore, no sir. Well, out of the goodness of my heart - I'm a a real sucker for these sob stories - I decided to guide him on the path to hamhood, by showing him how to hunt his own food. I'm a believer in teaching a ham to fish... wait, that sounds familiar.

Me: You didn't...

Mr. Ham: No, of course not! Can you imagine Mr. Robo with a rifle? He'd probably blow his own leg off. But I'll keep the Amazon drone interception trick in mind for next time.

Me: Just a year and it's gotten big. Some people have been trying these things out at the college basketball courts too. Wouldn't have thought it to be economical, but this just shows how quickly tech can swallow industries. Fashion - wonder how many ImageNet techniques they're using - cooking, living, rather involved camouflage, fund transfer in the case of Bitcoins... nothing's safe. But about Mr. Robo...

Mr. Ham: Yes, chimp-pig, That's the trouble with technology - no personalized touch. All right, all right, I just showed him how to forage for his own food, like this go-getter guy:


(Source: 9GAG)


But how was I supposed to know that Mr. Robo is not very fast, or that bunnies can be seriously mean when it involves carrots? But it's okay, my old gang had some of their usual bed quota to spare, so I fixed Mr. Robo up, gratis. I'm too charitable for my own good, I tell ya, I must be getting soft.


An End To This Bit

Depending on whether Mr. Ham has plowed Mr. Robo's funds in yet, they might be in for a rough ride, with prices dipping below US$800 on most exchanges already, after striking a US dollar peak of US$1240 on December 4. It turned out to be China (who may have their own mercantile interests in mind), not the USA, who started the clampdown about then. Nothing old-timers haven't seen before, and there's still a couple of months of bubble deflation to come, if history is any guide.


Stallman weighs in
[and Adi Shamir of RSA fame has been investigating too!]


The longer-term outlook remains cautiously upbeat, though we're probably at the stage where outrageous appreciation can no longer be expected, particularly for Bitcoin; if there's any doubt that the concept has taken root, cryptocurrencies have gone meta, with the technical backend becoming commodified, which means that the pool of junk-tier coins should explode in short order.

As is often the case where money is concerned, the Lion City is jumping on the bandwagon, as they did for information technology (which the incumbents may be regretting) and the life sciences (which may, as long suspected, lean to the fairer sex - biology may be a big part of destiny, blank-slate theorists aside). Several new local exchanges are springing up, and while this will cut into the inaccessibility premium, the increased depth can only be positive. After a bit of simulated poking about, I reckon arbitrage's probably not worth it (other than the buy-elsewhere-sell-Mt.Gox route, which is down to them not paying out in a timely manner), but for those who want to dabble in it, there's a free PHP bot available.

To remain grounded, it's good to hear the other side, which includes the criticism that cryptocurrencies cannot be money because their exchange rate is not predictable (point bolded in article), and are in fact a Ponzi. Starting with the Ponzi accusation, which I addressed more than two years ago, but will cover in more detail now - in a classic Ponzi, huge returns are promised, and early investors' earnings are funded by later investors. For example, in a "double your money" Ponzi, the last (and largest) generation of participants loses it all, while all previous generations indeed get their 100% return.

That part set straight, it is clear that nobody in authority is claiming that cryptocurrencies will have a guaranteed return, or any return at all. Oh, there are plenty of "Bitcoin will pass US$100000 by 2016" shills, but those who take them (or stock market watch talk show hosts) at their word probably deserve what they get. Are cryptocurrencies volatile? Yes. Speculative? Certainly. But Ponzi? Not by definition, no.

Now, as to whether Bitcoins and their ilk can be money. Indeed, the big price swings discourage their use as such - if one thinks that a Bitcoin will be worth US$2000 in the near future, why would he want to spend it today? To be more precise, it's probably the case that Bitcoins are not money - but only to the degree that gold and other precious metals are not money either. One common rejoinder is that Bitcoin has no intrinsic value, unlike gold, but one then suspects that it is the monetary properties of gold and other precious metals that drives their value, far more than industrial demand.

Running through the properties: divisibility and fungibility are satisfied, but these are not too impressive by themselves. Medium of exchange? So far, not too good, in large part due to its wild swings. But store of value? It seems to me that's where much of its utility actually lies for the time being, to purists' dismay and for all the talk of vendor acceptance, what with the printing presses still humming along without slowing.

A warning, though - it is absolutely true that cryptocurrencies do away with transaction fees; one no longer has to hand banks, credit card companies or the taxman their cut. However, the general consumer pays for it in other ways. To begin with, lose your account details, and all those virtual coins are gone. Forever. There's no customer service representative to meet in person, no appeal to the branch vice-president. It's irredeemably lost. Bye-bye. Sayonara. Hard copy backups are a good idea, if you've serious coin.

Same goes for making purchases. Hit the return key, and discover after a few months of waiting for the goods that you've been scammed? No chargebacks, no recourse. Sure, third-party intermediaries providing such insurance will probably be set up, but in this case they will likely have to take their cut too, which kind of defeats the point.

I suppose expounding too much on these matters is unbecoming for a graduate student, and I'll therefore be freezing discussions on this topic (bar truly significant developments) until March next year, by which time we should be able to tell if our expectations have borne out.


Overdrawn

"Our midfield is made up of a player thats been out of form for a year and a half, a 40 year old converted left winger, a target man, and a striker."

- Redcafe, on the Valencia-Giggs-Fellaini-Welback midfield


United lost again, one-nil to Newcastle, which will do new man Moyes no favours at all - 22 points from 15 games is decidedly mid-table standard, and the way they're playing, it's certainly not worth S$64/month (what SingTel is trying to squeeze). They're in real danger of finishing outside the Champions League places at the moment, and while I'm all for giving new managers time, I don't expect Moyes to be given more than one season if that comes to pass. Good luck.

Closer to home, Francis Jeffers will be playing in the S.League (note: it's a dot now, not a dash - very important!) with Brunei DPMM. For some reason, he was one of those guys I always thought was hitting thirty even when he first appeared a decade back, so I was surprised that he's just 32.

Friday was World Cup draw day, per the accustomed pattern of young ladies doing the presenting before old men pick their balls, which does a lot to help defuse any nastiness in the event that any party feels like they've been robbed. If I remember right, Nate Silver has Brazil to win it all again, a rather safe call given that the hosts have finished in the top three in nearly two-thirds (12/19) of previous editions, and lifted the trophy close to a third (6/19) of the time.

Moreover, even without the home ground boost, Brazil are top of ESPN's Soccer Power Index, a Silver statistical innovation that attempts to take more details into account than FIFA's official ranking procedure. A quick check reveals that they largely concur - 147 of the 209 FIFA members have an SPI rank that is within 21 places (i.e. 10%) of their FIFA rank. The biggest discrepancies are Cuba, which FIFA puts at 47th and SPI at 137th, and Guinea-Bissau, which FIFA puts at 183rd and SPI at 120th; Singapore is agreed to be in the region of 154th to 168th, which sounds fair enough. Personally, I still feel that FIFA's list is more accurate.

[N.B. The SPI has seven nations not on FIFA's list: French Guiana, Guadeloupe, Martinique, Netherlands Antilles, Northern Mariana Islands, St. Martin and Zanzibar. It's fair to say that none are powerhouses, with Zanzibar the highest-ranked at 103. For comparism, we ignore all these teams]

While the online mood seems to be that Group E, and then C, are the easiest of the bunch, they are actually average in terms of mean SPI rank. Ecuador for one seem to be vastly underestimated (but to be fair, I don't know any of their players other than Valencia). Group G has been dubbed the Group of Death, but one doesn't need rankings to realise that B and D are horrid to qualify from too. The latest finalists together in B? England-Italy-Uruguay in D? Their only saving grace is that Australia and Costa Rica respectively are not expected to challenge, making them three-horse races.


PARAGUAY! PARAGUAY!
Oh, they didn't make it this time...
(Source: Yahoo! Sport)


In actuality, one suspects that G is actually a three-horse race too, just that it'll be Portugal, Ghana and the USA battling to join Germany. The SPI concurs, giving Germany an over 91% chance of advancing, which is far from unjustified given the Germans' pedigree - they have been in the top three for the last three World Cups, and have reached the final eight for the last fifteen World Cups (sixty years). Now that's consistency.

And what of England? I fear it may be a bridge too far, though if they do squeak through, they actually have a good shot at the quarter-finals, given that the sides in Group C aren't that scary. Of course, chances are that they'll then face one of Brazil, Spain or Holland, and it'll not be pretty on current form. I'd stick a fiver on England if their odds go to about 50-1, though.

Ah, let's just predict it all (in points order):

Group A: Brazil, Croatia [Mexico, Cameroon out]
Group B: Spain, Netherlands [Chile, Australia out]
Group C: Colombia, Japan [Greece, Ivory Coast out]
Group D: Italy, Uruguay [England, Costa Rica out]
Group E: Switzerland, France [Ecuador, Honduras out]
Group F: Argentina, Nigeria [Bosnia, Iran out]
Group G: Germany, Portugal [USA, Ghana out]
Group H: Belgium, Russia [South Korea, Algeria out]

And on to the knockout phase, round of 16:

R16-1: Netherlands [Brazil out] (shocker!)
R16-2: Uruguay [Colombia out]
R16-3: Switzerland [Nigeria out]
R16-4: Germany [Russia out]
R16-5: Spain [Croatia out]
R16-6: Italy [Japan out]
R16-7: Argentina [France out]
R16-8: Portugal [Belgium out]

The big observation here is that the draw isn't quite so rosy for Brazil as might be thought. Ten to one, they'll be up against one of Spain or the Netherlands in this round, and I wouldn't have them as favourites against either. If they do fall at this stage, there will be hell to pay from the Brazilian public, and the mood for the remainder of the tournament will be completely changed.

Quarter-finals:

QF-1: Uruguay [Netherlands out]
QF-2: Germany [Switzerland out]
QF-3: Spain [Italy out]
QF-4: Portugal [Argentina out]

It would be poetic if Uruguay avenge their 2010 semi-final defeat here, and they do have the hard-nosedness to kick the Dutch out. Switzerland may have beaten Germany last year in a friendly, but that was after a run of 16 losses and two draws. No contest. Spain, while probably already peaked, should still be too good for Italy in the meeting of the two latest world champions, while Ronaldo finally pips Messi in a big upset.

Semi-finals:

SF-1: Germany [Uruguay out]
SF-2: Spain [Portugal out]

The Germans enter the finals, having managed to quietly fly under the radar all the while, only for the world to suddenly remember that they were rather good all along. As much as Spain is getting tiring, they are still a level above Portugal.

Finally:

Finals: Germany [Spain runners-up]
Who cares: Portugal [Uruguay 4th]

And the Germans win.



comments (0) - email - share - print - direct link
trackbacks (3) - trackback url


Next: Heaven And Hell


Related Posts:
The Cup At World's End
Battle of Nuremburg
Two Weeks
Best Korea
Bolbolbol
Back to top




3 trackbacks

Trackback by google advertising rates
google advertising rates - [bert's blog]


September 2, 2014 - 02:56 SGT     
Trackback by How To hack facebook accounts
How To hack facebook accounts - [bert's blog]


September 20, 2014 - 00:19 SGT     
Trackback by gold ira account
gold ira account - [bert's blog - Learning The Hard Way]


October 2, 2014 - 05:59 SGT     

Copyright © 2006-2025 GLYS. All Rights Reserved.