Contest math problems require specialized skills and tricks that are different from doing research. It's like asking how an elite soccer player would perform running the hurdles. Better than a lay person, perhaps very well with training, perhaps not.
Try fish. The quoting rules are simple. I never have to read the docs or try repeatedly to get quoting right. The shell syntax in general is small and simple.
The only downside to fish is that it's not POSIX compliant, but if you're familiar with POSIX shells this is rarely a problem for interactive use, and you can use Bash for scripting if you like.
I'm surprised at how _few_ posts/articles like this there have been, so far: self-driving cars are taking off and are a big looming imminent threat to Uber/taxi/truck drivers.
Every time I take an Uber now, I wonder if the driver realizes that his job will most likely be automated away in a couple of years.
There's way more posts/articles than warranted. Human drivers are going nowhere anytime soon. There's a lot of marketing about self-driving cars but nowhere enough actual technology to back it.
Is it just me or does the article fail to mention/estimate/discuss how much money the universities received _from_ hedge funds? It repeats over and over again how much the schools _paid_ in managers' fees, but if the return was several times that amount, then I guess I don't see the problem.
If they did show that data, it would look worse. On average, universities don't outperform (far lower-cost) index funds with similar objectives, per the recent HN story:
The article focuses on universities' investments in hedge funds specifically. The numbers in the article suggest that on the high end, about 10–20% of an endowment will be in a hedge fund.
The question I have is, what are the typical returns just on that 10–20% investment?
The endowment can do poorly (as bad as or worse than an index fund) as a whole, even if the investment into hedge funds is paying out well.
Sure, but (by most metrics) hedge funds are going to be riskier/more volatile and you have to lock up your money for longer. So the same return would count as worse performance if placed in hedge fund (and that's not even accounting for differences in expenses yet).
Hedge funds as a group are only risky and volatile compared to mutual funds. Their degree of riskiness varies tremendously, and there are a great number of them that would offering investment management that is tremendously less risky than an index fund.
The argument is that, with few exceptions, anyone operating at this size is basically going to hit average market returns. A couple of these Universities seem to have particularly gifted investment managers, but, even there it's debatable.
It's the same old story everywhere: Do you stick the money in a 0.2% fee index fund and ride the wave, or do you spend 20% of your returns on fees in the hope you're going to get lucky?
