|
yeah, kind of a silly tweet along the lines of "100 WOW gold can be bought for 1 IRL dollar, so a mount that costs 100k gold is worth 1000 dollars - so people are spending a thousand bucks on fake online animals, what is the world coming to" i have no idea how scarce robux are or how to get them but if someone has a big stash of them that are otherwise useless and decides to spend them on an equally useless fancy hat, who cares? this doesn't really say anything about NFTs or the new digital economy or whatever
|
#
?
May 25, 2021 17:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 20:38 |
|
|
Looking up Roblox, it looks like there's more ways than just buying them outright to generate Robux, and it doesn't look like you can redeem robux for real money or game time like with Eve or Secondlife, so it's really not actual money being spent. That money belongs to microsoft now, these are just the funbux economy circulating.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2021 17:41
|
|
|
In game cosmetics can at least be used to make your character look cool, unlike NFTs which can do ?????
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2021 18:06
|
|
|
OctaMurk posted:In game cosmetics can at least be used to make your character look cool, unlike NFTs which can do ????? BRB making a NFT of a screencap of a character in Roblox with a Gucci cosmetic quoting your post.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2021 18:18
|
|
|
OctaMurk posted:In game cosmetics can at least be used to make your character look cool, unlike NFTs which can do ????? one of the first uses of nfts was to allow trading videogame items ~on the blockchain~ for some terrible bitcoiner videogame
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2021 18:53
|
|
|
RPATDO_LAMD posted:one of the first uses of nfts was to allow trading videogame items ~on the blockchain~ for some terrible bitcoiner videogame No one plays those Blockchain videogames for a reason.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2021 18:55
|
|
|
Fame Douglas posted:No one plays those Blockchain videogames for a reason. if you think about it, this is actually good for bitcoin gaming fewer players mean we don't have to handle more than 7 trades per second
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2021 18:59
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/Lemonade_Inc/status/1396868192019099655 An insurance company brings back a methodology that was the second most racist pseudoscience since phrenology, but with AI!
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2021 19:51
|
|
|
xarph posted:https://twitter.com/Lemonade_Inc/status/1396868192019099655 Can wait to be denied because i have shifty eyebrows. E: https://twitter.com/Lemonade_Inc/status/1396868193029873664 lol that this is something you would say to the public, and not keep to an investor's pitch. Look how good our AI is at denying your claims! Buy your policy today!.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2021 19:55
|
|
|
Fame Douglas posted:No one plays those Blockchain videogames for a reason. Counterpoint : I downloaded this today and I’m having a cool time riding stonks with my doge 
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2021 20:09
|
|
|
xarph posted:https://twitter.com/Lemonade_Inc/status/1396868192019099655 Hey, this is cutting edge discrimination. Besides the tradition discrimination against BiPoC, they have added discrimination against people with autism and people with disabilities. The left hand of Bob's face doesn't move. Thus he must be lying and not have had a stroke. One of Sally's eyes didn't move. She must be committing fraud. No way that's a glass eye.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2021 21:28
|
|
|
Debate & Discussion > Tech Nightmares: We can disguise phrenology by using algorithms!
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2021 21:38
|
|
|
I'm really curious what the base dataset they fed into this thing was. Like how exactly does this AI learn who is untrustworthy, unless they are investigating 100% of claims for a while to get a baseline? Since they are definitely not doing that, it has to be coming off of some prebuilt dataset, and the only ones I can think of are the ones that rate faces by perceived untrustworthyness from other observers.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2021 22:24
|
|
|
Beelzebufo posted:I'm really curious what the base dataset they fed into this thing was. They interviewed people that said they could tell someone was lying "just by looking at them". 
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2021 22:48
|
|
|
Beelzebufo posted:Can wait to be denied because i have shifty eyebrows. My apartment complex recommended this company. I'm thinking I should probably get a new policy...
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2021 23:29
|
|
|
Beelzebufo posted:I'm really curious what the base dataset they fed into this thing was. Like how exactly does this AI learn who is untrustworthy, unless they are investigating 100% of claims for a while to get a baseline? Since they are definitely not doing that, it has to be coming off of some prebuilt dataset, and the only ones I can think of are the ones that rate faces by perceived untrustworthyness from other observers. They start by comparing your profile picture to a paper bag...
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2021 23:31
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2021 23:33
|
|
|
Beelzebufo posted:I'm really curious what the base dataset they fed into this thing was. Like how exactly does this AI learn who is untrustworthy, unless they are investigating 100% of claims for a while to get a baseline? Since they are definitely not doing that, it has to be coming off of some prebuilt dataset, and the only ones I can think of are the ones that rate faces by perceived untrustworthyness from other observers.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2021 23:54
|
|
|
Beelzebufo posted:https://twitter.com/Lemonade_Inc/status/1396868193029873664 Screenshotting this as Exhibit A in “insurance companies never made money by paying your claim”.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2021 00:19
|
|
|
Beelzebufo posted:https://twitter.com/Lemonade_Inc/status/1396868193029873664 No, this is something you tell the investors so they know you have a differentiator and a way to actually make a profit. You don't tell the public so that it's a "mystery" why their claims get denied.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2021 00:34
|
|
|
Did they hire former Tesla accountants? https://twitter.com/Lemonade_Inc/status/1396941058660048903
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2021 00:47
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:Did they hire former Tesla accountants? our insurance profits were great, as long as you don’t count the catastrophes that, you know, we insure against
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2021 01:06
|
|
|
Lead out in cuffs posted:Also the price of Gucci stuff is quite disconnected from the cost of manufacturing it, so it's not even surprising that Gucci pixels are worth a bunch of money. The secret behind luxury brands is that the insane price is the point. They don't need to be well made or look good, they just need to be expensive and exclusive. The more the better. Once someone gets to a certain level of wealth they reach a point where it is literally impossible to spend money faster than they make it. Take someone with $1billion investing at 4% return. That's $40million a year for doing nothing That's $770,000 a week. Every week. For the rest of their life. At that point, the concept of something being 'too expensive' doesn't exist and the idea that something isn't expensive enough takes hold.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2021 05:55
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:our insurance profits were great, as long as you don’t count the catastrophes that, you know, we insure against Loss ratio is claims/premiums. So I would assume they were doing the typical VC tech thing in 2017 where they subsidized premiums with VC money. And now they raised premiums and are using it as justification that their tech magic has improved their loss ratios.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2021 13:05
|
|
|
New business idea: insurance company for cars, that has one devices that monitors how safely you drive, but all it’s really doing is using your car’s engine to mine Bitcoin and selling the data for where you drive to advertisers.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2021 15:52
|
|
|
Sundae posted:New business idea: insurance company for cars, that has one devices that monitors how safely you drive, but all it’s really doing is using your car’s engine to mine Bitcoin and selling the data for where you drive to advertisers. Lol and when your sub runs out the cars brakes turn off automatically
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2021 16:07
|
|
|
Calumanjaro posted:Loss ratio is claims/premiums. So I would assume they were doing the typical VC tech thing in 2017 where they subsidized premiums with VC money. And now they raised premiums and are using it as justification that their tech magic has improved their loss ratios. the tweet said something to the effect of "our loss ratio was great"; then they did a follow-up tweet that said in essence "whoops we mean it was great once you remove catastrophes!" and the numbers made clear that, after catastrophes, it was bad
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2021 16:09
|
|
|
Is it possible that the “catastrophes” were reinsurance claims so would be in a different grouping?
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2021 16:11
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:the tweet said something to the effect of "our loss ratio was great"; then they did a follow-up tweet that said in essence "whoops we mean it was great once you remove catastrophes!" and the numbers made clear that, after catastrophes, it was bad I think they deleted the tweet thread and can't read exactly what they said. But it's usual to distribute catastrophes over multiple years. I read the tweets as "Our loss ratio's have improved due to our special tech". For this argument you would equally assign the catastrophic losses over both years. Their loss ratio being high implies that their premiums are too low. I suspect this is because they are subsidizing premiums in order to gain customers, and will then jack them up later.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2021 17:09
|
|
|
Calumanjaro posted:I think they deleted the tweet thread and can't read exactly what they said. But it's usual to distribute catastrophes over multiple years. they didn't say they spread them over multiple years. they said they didn't count them at all. an insurance company was not counting the impact of catastrophes in its statistic.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2021 17:18
|
|
|
quote:they didn't say they spread them over multiple years. they said they didn't count them at all. an insurance company was not counting the impact of catastrophes in its statistic. When your brainstorming session gives you lemons, make Lemonade.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2021 17:30
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:the tweet said something to the effect of "our loss ratio was great"; then they did a follow-up tweet that said in essence "whoops we mean it was great once you remove catastrophes!" and the numbers made clear that, after catastrophes, it was bad The first tweet said 'our loss ratios after this great AI tech were ~75% whereas before they were terrible at 350%', then a second tweet said 'just to be clear as per our investor guidance in FY2021a blah blah actually our terrible loss ratio was because of the Texas storm' and I don't think they ever made a fair comparison.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2021 17:40
|
|
|
Beelzebufo posted:Can wait to be denied because i have shifty eyebrows. https://twitter.com/Lemonade_Inc/status/1397564444247527427 https://twitter.com/rachelmetz/status/1397625251257753606
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2021 21:10
|
|
|
companies lying on twitter? ...or companies lying to the SEC & investors?? 
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2021 21:17
|
|
|
Delta-Wye posted:companies lying on twitter? ...or companies lying to the SEC & investors?? You'd think investors would like that since the company isn't wasting time reviewing those applications.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2021 06:06
|
|
|
There's a new crypto fad in town https://twitter.com/rbranson/status/1397598281975230464 This time we trade GPU cycles for Storage space! Good luck getting an SSD at a good price.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2021 15:28
|
|
|
what about the electricity costs to keep them running? Also, does whatever goofy bullshit their coin generation needs eventually kill the SSD?
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2021 15:45
|
|
|
Mister Facetious posted:what about the electricity costs to keep them running?
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2021 16:41
|
|
|
We really need to ban cryptocurrencies.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2021 16:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 20:38 |
|
|
GrandpaPants posted:We really need to ban cryptocurrencies. Which is why we will continue to embrace them as we slowly boil ourselves alive
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2021 17:01
|
|