Everything I have read about this glosses over this critical bit which I am very curious about. I understand there is/was a worldwide pandemic and all of that, but it feels to me that there wasn't necessarily a reason exams couldn't be taken in socially-distanced class rooms (with students wearing masks, as well as the teachers, of course) or if needed be in repurposed venues, like football stadiums (leaving plenty of space between students).
Was there a concern for fairness should the exams proceed? Or was it safety? Or did the government put their foot down on no exams? Or was it the teachers/unions? What happened?!
Absolutely. I just focused in finding good weight allocations for the given risk, but changing the objective function given to the negative of the sharpe ratio should get you good allocations that maximize the sharpe ratio.
You'll notice I am returning the expected return and variance of the returns. I didn't talk about it too much (besides a high level risk vs. returns at the end) because I didn't want to introduce another concept, but you can readily compare the sharpe ratio using those.
Yes, exactly. I was looking to solve the second problem, not the former. Following the secretary rule is good strategy for a lot of things, but I think we actually have more information here.
I am not super well versed on the secretary problem but I think some people have already looked into it for AC [1].
In general, what I was looking was to associate a risk profile to a series of decisions of either HOLD or SELL(amount) given the current probability distribution.
Hey there, author here. For sure, I hinted at this on the last paragraph of the post. The interesting bit is that if you do that you will build a more diversified portfolio (as the turnip price distributions on other islands are not correlated).
And for sure, if you have access to other people islands a lot of this becomes moot, as you will probably just sell at the highest price in any of your friends islands :)
I'm very sorry to sound harsh, but you have a fundamental misunderstanding on how economy works. It's not the government who choses an exchange rate (or for that matter, the value of anything), it's the market. If you choose to believe that Cadivi was a 'great' thing, you are simply living in a fantasy fueled by high oil prices and cheap dollars that make you think that this was 'great'.
The thing with free rides is that, no matter how high or 'great' they sound on paper, they eventually end, and you see the real problems.
> "Importers could buy stuff with their black market dollars and then replenish their stash when Cadivi finally payed them."
Sounds just great. A 'great' working economy, working around arbitrage and fantasies. I don't need to have 'political biases' to see that Chavez, whose agenda crippled the entire private sector and killed every other possibility of economic growth that didn't depend on oil, would be in exactly the same position as Maduro.
Do you honestly believe Chavez would not be in this position? Seriously? (de pana?) Venezuela was doing 'great' because oil prices were soaring, which in turn made dubious economic policy affordable. Chavez did enjoy massive political support, mainly because venezuelans do enjoy their free rides (just look up how many pensions and public jobs Venezuela has, which, by the way, are now the ones being affected the most by this crisis).
I am absolutely sure that Maduro, while incompetent, is in the same kind of problems Chavez would be, and is pushing the same agenda Chavez would have. Let's not get confused by personality cult here.
Alon Halevy is pretty big in the field of data integration. Some of my undergrad project was about improving certain aspects on his work on LAV integration. You might also find his work by Alon Levy instead of Halevy. If you want a theoretical view of the field, checkout Maurizio Lenzerini's work.
Somebody in the OP already commented about ostringstream and the article was updated accordingly. ostringstream is better, and I suposse more idiomatic.
Everything I have read about this glosses over this critical bit which I am very curious about. I understand there is/was a worldwide pandemic and all of that, but it feels to me that there wasn't necessarily a reason exams couldn't be taken in socially-distanced class rooms (with students wearing masks, as well as the teachers, of course) or if needed be in repurposed venues, like football stadiums (leaving plenty of space between students).
Was there a concern for fairness should the exams proceed? Or was it safety? Or did the government put their foot down on no exams? Or was it the teachers/unions? What happened?!