/sci/ - Science & Math

>>11432407
Life is just an attention grab modulated over resource constraints and endurance|stamina for a given focal point.

What else did ya want?

>wimmin'
>drugs
>for the cops to right fuck off. I ain't gonna play savior or encourage saviors because that is just bullshit exclusionism wrapped up in a faggot sandwhixh. Digital games for the aggression and sport for people with true ADD/ADHD.

Im a brainlet and got very angry after Reading it

Ponzi scheme
>well our public fund lost money, but our secret private fund was the most successful of all time, we just can't say exactly how (it's a secret)
Wow imagine that, never heard that before.

>>11432488
Taxation 101

>>11432488
>Ponzi scheme that didn't accept new clients for years and even now is extremely picky for new clients if it even picks up any in a given year

What a shitty ponzi scheme.

>>11432554
Artificial scarcity is another classic scam trope. They don't need to pile on new investors when the existing are willing to keep funneling money into an investment that year over year hasn't even performed better than the S&P 500 when you account for fees, while they skim the money off the top and use a "secret employee fund" to account for the stolen money/avoid taxes on it. I don't know how ANYONE could actually buy the whole story, especially when we have seen the exact same thing play out so many times. Ren Tech is barely better than Bitconnect, they just embellished the story on their secret sauce more by hiring "ivy league physicists" to work on it.

>>11432581
Rentech's asset and Jim's net worth have increased even in time periods where no new investor money was flowing in though.

>>11432597
Because numbers get embarrassed when you look at them and always want to be bigger for you, papi.

>>11432597
True, the most plausible explanation is they discovered the secret money formula

>>11432407
>It's like they're extremely crass and would play dirty to get the limelight. Kinda like a highschool teen drama.

>A guess the whole "le humble scientist" isnt real, lol. They're all clambering to be the best

You must not have met many or even been to university. Being at the highest level of ANY field is EXTREMELY cut throat. The dirtiest politics exist in academia. It's the highest IQ people trying to out do each other, what did you expect? People are competitive and vindictive, that of course exists in STEM.

Robert Mercer, previous CEO, was one of the main elities funding right wing populism in Europe and America. Breitbart, Brexit, and Donald Trump all received large funding from him. You should thank them. Sadly, his role got publicized somehow and he was forced to resign.

>>11432745
yeah, the alliance between Jim Simons and Robert Mercer was always weird to me. Jim is a big democrat afaik. i think this goes back to when RenTech was young and based Jim was just trying to recruit a capable team. the fact that billions of dollars flowed in due to Jim's idea and that Mercer got a chunk of it is an unfortunate accident of history. as far as i can tell. but probably there is more to the story.

>>11432407
>It's like they're extremely crass and would play dirty to get the limelight. Kinda like a highschool teen drama.
Welcome to the entirety of the real world. It's not just scientists, it's not just in academia, it's not just in industry - it's everywhere by everyone. It's petty office politics all the way down.

>>11432796
Muh entrenched nepotism 101

>>11432581
I want to say that you just don't know what you are talking about but that would be dishonest. In reality, you are simply not intelligent (or objective) enough.

Let me ask you this:
What is the best strategies in trading that you can easily think of and what is there yield if you had to guess given relatively low assets under management?

What returns are realistic for a 99.9 percentile fund to achieve given low AUM?

>>11432907
The thread's average IQ just went down 50% with your arrival.

>>11432907
>What is the best strategies in trading that you can easily think of
Insider trading

>What returns are realistic for a 99.9 percentile fund
Realistic by what standard? If it's realistic and honest, the strategy could be shared. Of course, it's not, under the guise of protecting their IP.
Just as there is a range of performance in funds, there is also a range of honesty. You, someone who is pretending to know what you are talking about, obviously know there have always been and always will be funds that violate SEC law (or other law, like tax law, which Ren Tech was caught violating to the tune of millions) to varying degrees. Historically, many funds or investments in the top percentile have been a range between questionable ethics to outright scams.
If Ren Tech isn't raising red flags for you, you're a fucking moron and don't know anything about trading.
>nooo they are the real deal they use physicists instead of traders because they fucking love science and they are proving science nerds can beat the Wall Street jocks!

We see this play out with all cheating really, baseball, cycling, etc. Obviously athletes will fall across a spectrum of performance, just like funds. There's a point where it stops adding up though, like when you look at the Tour de France times up Col de Tourmalet for instance. All of a sudden tour cyclists start putting out 15% more watts/kg. People inevitably get caught, let's say Pantani, who was climbing the same speed as Armstrong, yet was shown to be on enough doping agents to kill a horse. People, like you, STILL believed Armstrong wasn't cheating, while it was attributed to stupid magic training and his special cadence. It just keeps happening over and over, Froome starts putting out those w/kg numbers, and people attribute it to other special magic training. Same formula every time, ponzi scheme, sports cheater, etc., people always eat it up.

>>11432968
Why would an adder circuit strategy attempt to isolate profit and not bolster the system applied to as a whole?

>Since when was moving digits from electronic circuit to electronic circuit via arbitrary pattern match and signal execution worth anything to labor?

>>11432922
Due to my IQ being so much higher than yours it would be more likely for the original normalization to be inaccurate than me being 200 IQ (relatively speaking). Ergo, the new lower average.

>>11432968
>misses the point.

I can't believe I have to restate my argument as my intention was obvious, but perhaps not to you. Furthermore, I never used that they are physicists as an argument as that would be quite retarded.

What are the best LEGAL strategies for trading that you can think of?

This should be quite easy to answer and is just a test of aptitude which I think you lack.

What returns are realistic for a 99.9 percentile fund in YOUR opinion?

You clearly missed the point of this question but I ask you to answer it again. The reason I ask this is because I want to find out what level of returns you start to suspect it to be a scam.

>renaissance cheating taxes.
Again you are displaying your ignorance.
Are you familiar with short term capital gains tax? How do you avoid it on short term trades?
This should be obvious to you if you are not retarded.