Comment author: thomblake 25 July 2013 02:35:11PM 7 points [-]

Given the timing, it seems more likely in-universe that the particular English translation of that bible passage was lifted from the wizard motto.

Comment author: Petruchio 25 July 2013 03:11:50PM 3 points [-]

I am confused.

The particular Bible passage was written in Greek a solid millennia before Hogwarts was built, it was available in Latin at least since the 4th century (Latin being the language of the educated post-Roman Empire, and the language which magic seems to be based off of), and, according to a quick Wikipedia search, translated into Old English by the Venerable Bede in the 7th century.

Comment author: kilobug 25 July 2013 02:10:05PM -1 points [-]

It doesn't seem that unlikely given two facts :

  1. Wizards don't seem to know much, nor care much, about Muggle religions. Having a reference to the Bible and Jesus Christ in a tomb of wizards strikes me as very unlikely.

  2. The Potter family is descendant of one of the Peverell brothers, inheriting the Cloak of Invisibility, a Deathly Hallow from him. That makes "The last enemy to be destroyed is death" a more likely motto for the Potter family.

Comment author: Petruchio 25 July 2013 03:00:27PM 2 points [-]
  1. Wizards celebrate both Christmas and Easter. No idea why they would, but that is established in HPMoR and in canon. With the exception of Roger Bacon, we have not heard much of anything about religious witches or wizards, but it will strike me as strange the magical world has no religions, if only from the muggleborns and their descendants.

  2. The quote "The last enemy to be destroyed is death" precedes the Peverell brothers by a solid millennia. While the Deathly Hallows is provides (weak) evidence in the other direction, even if it were a family motto, the origination is probably from the bible, as would be common from an old, heraldic family. Still, it is sounds like a suitable epitaph.

And of course, this presumes another deviation from canon, or to say a myth from canon, that the Peverell brothers created the Deathly Hallows, rather than receiving them from Death. Death, who exists in as a semi-sentient semi-being in HPMoR.

On a related note… What happened to the tattered cloak left by the Dementor in Chapter 45? May there be two True Cloaks of Invisibility?

Comment author: Petruchio 25 July 2013 01:22:03PM 2 points [-]

It strikes me as strange taking the words "The last enemy to be destroyed is death" as a family motto and manifesto, considering that it orginates from 1 Corinthians 15:26, concerning the resurrection of the dead, Jesus Christ's second coming and the abolishment of death. While it is similiar to Harry's goal, it certainly opposes it by way of means. Harry seeking the abolishment of death through mortal, albeit supernatural and magical, means opposes the divine plan of God. That Harry took this as a mission pasted down the Potter line generation to generation seems a lot more unlikely than it being a suitable epitaph on a gravestone.

Comment author: Petruchio 17 July 2013 05:44:34PM 1 point [-]

Perhaps I am missing something, this seems to be an accurate model of opportunism of which blackmail itself is a subset. Namely, both examples given are a type of opportunism which the agent exploits the target's desire for a particular value (either reputation or a MacGuffin) for profit, despite the risks of lost value balanced against the target's anticipated value. Blackmail, colloquially, is typically used to denote the above by use of incriminating information (such as steamy letters), while purchasing the MacGuffin may be called any number of things depending on the character of the act.

Comment author: Petruchio 11 July 2013 12:07:09PM 2 points [-]

Besides Viliam_Bur's comment, I would say do the math. Assign a numerical value to each aspect to the location, weigh them accordingly, and compare the final values. After this is done, toss it all out and go with your (informed) gut instinct.

Comment author: Petruchio 11 July 2013 11:41:11AM 2 points [-]

I tried to get onto the Uberman sleep schedule twice while at university, but ended up failing around 5 days in. Your plan of easing into it may significantly improve the probability of success, so I am very excited for you.

One thing to watch out for is the increase intake of food. When doing it the first time, I did not think to connect a 37.5% increase in waking time with an increase in calories. I ended up having bouts of extreme coldness in the middle of the night because of this, which added one more thing to the unpleasantness of being awake.

Be careful of micro sleeping, where you fall asleep for a fraction of a second at a time. I do not know how to avoid it except powering through. You may experience hallucinations, or more accurately, you'll fall asleep, have a vivid dream, wake up and not realized you fell asleep in the first place. Again, this occurs over a half a second or so.

There might be some supplements that will assist with the schedule, but I do not know which. Omega-3 fatty acid probably will help. A multi-vitamin wouldn’t hurt either. Soylent, if it works, would be perfect for this project.

I do not have an accommodating job for the Uberman or even the Everyman schedule, but I wish the best of luck.

[LINK] XKCD Comic #1236, Seashells and Bayes' Theorem

-7 Petruchio 10 July 2013 11:05AM

A fun comic about seashells and Bayes' Theorem. http://xkcd.com/1236/

[LINK] Mr. Money Mustache on Back of the Napkin Calculations and Financial Planning

-2 Petruchio 24 June 2013 05:14PM

A new Mr. Money Mustache article for those who enjoyed my sequence on financial planning and extreme early retirement.

When the Back of the Napkin can be Worth Millions

Comment author: Viliam_Bur 24 May 2013 09:30:51AM *  2 points [-]

How much are these estimates influenced by a hindsight bias; by a knowledge that during the last century the American economy was able to provide this growth, but many other countries' economies were ruined at some moment. -- What would happen if someone tried this early retirement idea 100 ago by investing half of their income into Russian market and taking away only 4% per year? How about Germany?

Even if I believe that within the next 50 years some markets will safely provide 4% annual growth, what is the probability that USA will be in that set, and how would you derive this probability from an outside view?

Comment author: Petruchio 24 May 2013 01:28:38PM 1 point [-]

It is not a hindsight bias; it is based using an analysis of historical returns to anticipate future returns, which is a distinction. But you make a good point on comparing the American economy to foreign economy. If someone invested in the Russian economy 100 years ago, they would have lost everything in the Communist Revolution, likewise if they invested in Germany, they would have lost it in WWI, WWII and the partition of East and West Germany. However if you invested in either country 30 years ago, you would have made bank on the fall of Communism.

Generally, if is difficult to hedge against political risks in your own country. If WWIII happens, then pretty much nothing is guaranteed. Investments, property, careers and lives are in uncertain flux, and all may be lost. Barring such catastrophic events, I may hedge the risk of American underperforming the rest of the work by investing in foreign companies, or trans-national companies. This is not something I will be doing right now (I have more faith in America’s economy then the rest of the world) but it is something to consider for the future.

Comment author: Wei_Dai 24 May 2013 07:21:52AM *  5 points [-]

This is a 4% withdrawal rate, and should last you forever. If you want to go even safer (the Trinity Study suggests that 4% is plenty safe) go with 3% and multiple your expenses by 33.

According to The 4 Percent Rule is Not Safe in a Low-Yield World, the 4% withdraw rate was calculated to have a 6% failure probability over 30 years using historical data. Using today's lower interest rates to recompute, the failure probability over 30 years is now 57%.

Comment author: Petruchio 24 May 2013 01:08:35PM 2 points [-]

It is true that with a 50% stock, 50% bond diversification, there has been a small historical failure rate for the 4% withdrawal rate. If the first 30 years after my retirement are the worst seen since WWII, then I may be in trouble.

With this in mind, we may hedge against this. You may work for a bit longer and save enough to go with a 3.5% or even a 3% withdrawal rate, take on jobs or projects intermittently during your retirement to boost your savings, or receiving social security or some other another government social program once you are old enough to qualify. Other more random factors which may hedge in your favor will be your children growing up and moving out of the house (permanently lowering your expenses), downsizing your home or moving to a rental once your kids are grown, or receiving an inheritance.

Of course, the paper you cite anticipates a higher failure rate due to lower bond rates. These lower rates may be a historical aberration, as mentioned in the abstract. I have not invested in bonds because of the very low rates, and am holding a stock-only, albeit dividend paying, index fund. I view bonds as a hedge against deflation. Besides junk bonds, the ROI is much too low for my taste.

I am anticipating an eventual portfolio of 50% Stock, 30% REITs and 20% Bonds, unlike the study’s 50% stock, 50% bond. I also hope to have some rental property, but this is a long term idea. In the meantime, I should anticipate more volatility, but until I retire I will be comfortable with that. If you, on the other hand, prefer otherwise, you should go with bonds, save more and aim for a lower withdrawal rate.

However, the crux of this sequence is not investing, but extreme saving. Investing strategies differ due to anticipated needs and tolerance of risk. However, making a habit of saving most of your income should give you the greatest possible utility no matter what your investment or retirement plans are.

View more: Prev | Next