This is their only option. Someone who is the head of security for a hospital IT department needs access to mythos, and some 17 year old with fraud convictions doesn't.
It's the same reason we require ID for alcohol and gun purchases. Obviously it isn't a perfect system, teens drink but good luck suggesting that 13 year old should be allowed to buy alcohol.
Yeah, it's a 24 year old company that controls space Internet and is the most competent company building data centers. If a passive index doesn't include it they are taking a much stronger opinion on the stock than if they do include it.
If it's a poorly run fraudulent company the regulators and the banks are at fault for letting it go public not the indicies
The goal of SP500 is to provide exposure to the 500 biggest companies, not protect shareholders. I think IBM might do poorly when AI destroys their overpriced IT outsourcing business, but that doesn't mean SP500 should kick them out.
Yes, if someone thinks that the top 500 companies include too much risk then yes too bad, you need to move out of SPY.
It isn't called the S&P495 because they kick out 5 of the biggest companies that some people consider to be risky.
I personally think its super risky to want to be Diversified and NOT include any exposure to SpaceX. Yes, Elon is unique but that doesn't mean his companies are going to fail especially given the potential risk of AI changing the world. Is IBM going to keep selling overpriced IT outsourcing in 5 years?
Why do you assume SpaceX will be a failure? Do you have a track record of being correct on Elon companies? If SpaceX succeeds and its in the SPY from day one that serves everyone who owns index funds.
The whole point of index funds is that you don't have to pay management fees to managers. It's very expensive to hire a team of people to analyze the entire stock market in detail and chose the best 500 companies, and historically people who did that on average didn't beat the S&P500.
Just look up the performance of Mutual Funds vs S&P500.
This fundamentally misunderstand the point of an index. The fundamental reason S&P 500 exists is to let people buy the entire market ( the top 500 companies make up most of the entire market ). That is it. Period.
They are not saying these 500 companies are going to be the most successful in 6 months or 10 years. At one point Enron was 0.6% of S&P500 because it was a large company, not because the directors at S&P500 thought the management were honest people.
If you don't like that, fine, don't buy S&P500 and buy stocks or other funds that do have companies you like.
I don't understand why you assume that the government is following all the laws when it comes to cell phones and cloud data but won't when it comes to ring data?
Waymo cannot scale. So for most people it's irrelevant.
Tesla FSD makes driving 90% less taxing mentally. It does 99.9% of the driving perfectly. And its getting better. We are quickly approaching a situation where people who don't drive Teslas are like people who cut their grass with Sickle as compared to people who have driving lawn mowers
LOL, the BTC people who thought "Digital Gold" was a good slogan are going to learn what happened to self custody of gold and the gold standard.
BTC is in a much worse situation than gold was in 1970. The government has the technology to follow transactions and require BTC transactions to be done on their chain with their BTC equivalent GBTCs. That is until the government decides to issue print more BTC equivalents
The entire reason OpenAI has a high valuation is the expectation that AI will get a lot better in the next few years. If that happens, building a clone of Cursor/windsurf should be trivial. The only reason you would buy windsurf today is to either pump up the bubble OR use it to increase your market share of developers by taking users away from claude
Regardless of how valid the study is, it is most likely useless.
These kinds of studies have been done for decades and type 2 diabetes rates have only gone up.
There has been clear evidence for decades that obesity and high carb diets increase risk of diabetes. Comparing tea to coffee or Skittles to m&Ms is a useless research project as far as diabetes goes. Because it is extremely unlikely that someone will discover that the cure for diabetes was a small change in lifestyle like that.
The worst part of an agent is that they will not show you a house that is for sale by owner. They are actively limiting your options and you are paying them for that service
That all seem pretty similar to the ads on the front page of google search results.
Just generate 200 of those and test them to see if any of them standout.
The Utility in these models is not that they are perfect or better than humans at all times, but that it is very cheap and to generate something of value across many domains.
Have you heard of A/B testing? With this you could do A-Z testing. And then let a human review the top 5 results of that A-Z testing. Instead of tasking a human with writing 26 ads
That is true, but think about domains like Advertisements. Ads are currently far from perfect. A 5% click rate is a huge success. If 30% of the ads generated are low quality but 10% do really well it will be a huge benefit
It's the same reason we require ID for alcohol and gun purchases. Obviously it isn't a perfect system, teens drink but good luck suggesting that 13 year old should be allowed to buy alcohol.