This is great data, but missing one crucial piece: how much reach did each candidate achieve given their spend? Both what they directly paid for with the ads, and then what the ads achieved organically beyond the spend.
My suspicion is that Trump, by being outrageous, realizes far cheaper effective ad rates (i.e. when you factor in both paid & organic reach) than any other candidate.
Sadly negative comments are the norm here on hacker news. No matter how amazing the news, the top comment is usually a snarky takedown of the linked article.
(It's nice to see the top comment on this one is actually positive!)
I imagine fund investors will get instant exposure to any new crypto asset listed to coinbase or gdax. Which might be worth the price of admission alone if you think Coinbase listing an asset has the potential to drive the price up
Nah, the fund starts trading only 5 days after trading becomes available on GDAX. From the methodology paper: "Each reconstitution will occur at 5pm Pacific Time on the fifth day that the new asset is traded on GDAX. This is designed to reduce the effect of any temporary price volatility in the new asset in the first few trading days after its listing."
Presumably they'll be launching many more coins this year. There are other advantages in holding crypto through a fund rather than directly, like simplified tax accounting and not having to worry about security, either digital or physical.
They've announced a few times that they are not planning on adding any coins, anytime soon. I think they are better off focusing on this sort of project to keep current customers, marketing to get new ones and strengthening their customer support. New coins make all of those tasks much more complex, for probably very little competitive edge, at the moment.
If anything, I think the rich in Silicon Valley are the most willing to do something about it. Basic Income is a very popular idea amongst left-leaning wealthy people these days
Has investing in the stock market become democratized? Sure you could invest in Amazon at a low market cap back in the 90's, but what about Uber, Stripe, Dropbox, or any recent breakout 'unicorn'?
The privatization that has happened in financing high-growth startups is not great news for Joe Q Public
This is the central thesis, but the author made up the idea that we are supposed to already have these cars that are safer than humans. Nobody thinks this. Nobody.
> Elon Musk Says Tesla's Self-Driving Tech Already as Good as a Human Driver
Which is the exact opposite of what I said above. Elon's quote implies he thinks his cars would still kill around 30,000 people per year. That's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about a car that's thousands of times safer than a human. Not "as safe". "As safe" as a human is terrible performance and we should not allow those cars on streets without a driver if that is the case. No way.
I doubt such a lobbying effort will be necessary. You can still ride around in a horse-drawn carriage on most public roads. It seems far-fetched to think human-powered driving will be made illegal, it's far more likely that most people will just opt-out of it.
I also expect once autonomous vehicles are the majority of cars we'll see stricter enforcement of speeding laws. When everyone is speeding because that's the norm, you don't stand out. When every other car is self-driving at the limit and you're going 20 over in your Corvette, you stand out like a sore thumb. The UK already uses average speed cameras. I think the only reason they aren't widespread elsewhere is simply because many people speed.
>also expect once autonomous vehicles are the majority of cars we'll see stricter enforcement of speeding laws. When everyone is speeding because that's the norm, you don't stand out. When every other car is self-driving at the limit and you're going 20 over in your Corvette, you stand out like a sore thumb. The UK already uses average speed cameras. I think the only reason they aren't widespread elsewhere is simply because many people speed.
No, we'll see speed limits that reflect the speeds people actually travel and probably dynamic speed limits based on the 90th percentile rule (or whatever best practice rule we come up with to supersede that) instead of our current system by which speed limits are the max of what the various stakeholders will ok.
AITaxiCo and AIDeliveryCo are going to lobby the living hell out of reasonable (where reasonable is not a circular definition involving the current speed limit) limits because they don't want following the letter of the law to put them at a competitive disadvantage.
My suspicion is that Trump, by being outrageous, realizes far cheaper effective ad rates (i.e. when you factor in both paid & organic reach) than any other candidate.