People have been claiming "this is the end" of the US, for some reason or another, ever since I've been on the internet (since 2005).
This same sentiment was going around in 2016 when Trump was doing those ridiculous "bans" on immigration. Since then I would argue the US has only increased its influence and power over Europe. Europe needs help with the war and the US has already given immeasurable resources. Europe has almost no skin in the game when it comes to AI. Maybe that's a bubble but the point still stands.
Ofc I don't agree with what the current president is doing, but the idea that businesses and research will flock to Europe is amusing. They've certainly introduced enough barriers to ensure that won't happen.
Then it's subjective, what they define as a waste of money, this is par for the course when it comes to choosing what to fund.
You do not trust the current administration to be objective when it comes to cutting funding. I don't trust universities to be objective when it comes to funding.
I take any claims/studies from universities regarding gender/race with a huge grain of salt. There is too much room for bias and sensationalism. Not long ago there was a study claiming that white doctors were treating non-white babies with less care than white babies. However, the original authors made several mistakes and the study couldn't replicate.
Funnily enough, if you google percentage of medical studies that can't be replicated, you get 75% too :)
> "diversity related topics" included things like biodiversity which is an important area of research and should be apolitical. Not because of a shift in focus, but because of top-down orders to not fund anything related to "diversity."
Do you have a source for this? How can you prove it was simply because it was "diversity related" and not because it someone, somewhere determined the budget needed to be cut because the spending was wasteful?
As far as I can tell, the budget never passed, so we have no way to know one way or another the effects.
I have never seen a government entity claim that cutting their budget wouldn't be catastrophic.
Personally, as someone that has heard non-stop about how horrible the US is from Europeans ever since I was on the internet, I don't give statements from EU officials much weight. It isn't anything new.
I have family that has migrated _from_ Europe to the US, they still seem to hold this attitude that they know what is best for the US. They come live here for a higher quality of life and income, then go vacation in Europe like kings, talking about how much cheaper things are, without an ounce of irony. Not sure how they do it.
What is US losing, relative to Europe/other countries?
I can't really think of many notable things to come out of Europe as of late... besides maybe covid vaccines but its hard to really say that when 90% of the wikipedia page for the "creators" is about research and contributions that they did (and could really only do) in the US.
I'm OOTL, but there _is_ a ton of waste when it comes to money we give out.
The article itself even says here:
> [...] the US government has cut scientific grants to academics working on diversity-related topics, halted biomedical grants to international partners, and demanded universities shut down academic units that “belittle” conservative ideas [...]
I'd say it's fair to question if taxpayers should be paying for "diversity related projects." The "belittle conservative ideas" thing is problematic, as that is totally subjective. However, I don't think anyone can say in good faith that most universities aren't incredibly bias. Having been in one circa 2020, it was not a welcoming place if you weren't firmly liberal/progressive. Of course I have to place my disclaimer that I'm not a fan of what Trump is doing, or the man himself for that matter.
If they're putting life changing amounts of money into a company they should be doing a modicum of research on it. If someone gives $100k to a Nigerian prince, I don't think the US government should be spending thousands of dollars of resources on attempting to recover that money.
US citizens have never implicitly been allowed on these off-shore exchanges. You have to deliberately circumvent and lie to get an account.
Your complaint would be solved with less gray area.
Businesses outside of the US should be able to do business with US citizens _without_ the consent of the US government. This comes with the caveat that if you, the customer, reject the "protection" of the US government, you are completely and totally SOL if things go south.
However, it became hard to maintain an opensource version. I would say its still not a bad way to get a head start (bias there, ofc)
I will say, its not something that can be done "on the side." I originally made a decent amount of $ by getting lucky in crypto. I figured I'd "just become a algo trader" and it was much more difficult than I could have imagined.
I actually _just_ started a series on how to build an equity trading system from scratch. I planned to put part 1 out later this week but eh, I'll post it now, it touches on it better than my comment here can :)
* the post assumes you already have alpha (a profitable strategy)
> Has anyone done this successfully?
Regarding this, I actually originally talked a bit with the (now infamous) SBF of FTX about this. I originally wanted to join Alameda Research... but at the time, I didn't want to move across the world. For years I regretted that decision (not so much now, lol) I started my own firm though and I have made a decent amount of $. Truth be told though, knowing what I know now, I might have put more energy into a start up. I enjoy the challenges of algotrading but doing some consulting work, I think I enjoy "building" more than running statistical tests, cleaning data, etc etc.
To sum up this comment though, _if_ you had a profitable strategy and _if_ you built a system that could reliably execute trades, you certainly could be successful. It is very difficult though.
HFT is, more or less... but algo trading in general can be as simple as executing strategies you would otherwise manually perform. I believe there's still enough alpha out there.
This same sentiment was going around in 2016 when Trump was doing those ridiculous "bans" on immigration. Since then I would argue the US has only increased its influence and power over Europe. Europe needs help with the war and the US has already given immeasurable resources. Europe has almost no skin in the game when it comes to AI. Maybe that's a bubble but the point still stands.
Ofc I don't agree with what the current president is doing, but the idea that businesses and research will flock to Europe is amusing. They've certainly introduced enough barriers to ensure that won't happen.