Jurgis

One possible way of immortality is having your brain/mind scanned and deposited into new organic or inorganic receptacles. If copy could be kept, the accidental death would not be permanent. But, yes, there will be some deaths even in best case scenario, so you are right to not say "forever". :) Yes, there are a lot of questions/issues with this, but that's why it's called "singularity" - it's very hard to predict all the repercussions including social and economic ones. And, yes, it could lead to catastrophic crises, which is why I think that the outcome is rather binary.

Awareness and pessimism are not the same. :) You can be aware of a lot of things, but not be negative about them. I could go Zen on this, but I'll go Kipling: http://www.kiplingsociety.co.uk/poems_if.htm 8)

I'll go Kurzweil on this: if you don't die before 2050 or so, it is likely that you will live forever. In fact, it is likely that humanity is facing a binary outcome: either there will be a civilization-level collapse or there will be a positive singularity type of event after which the life as we know it will change into something very different. With practical immortality as a side effect. This is likely to happen in 2040's to 2070's at latest. So if you're young, keep in mind that the world will be very different sometime this century. Personally, I might or might not make it to this. Of course, Kurzweil is older than me and he hopes to make it, but I'm not as optimistic as he is. 8)

It is quite possible that they are too big to fail like Fannie Mae. And unlike US, if that happens, I doubt that shareholders would be able to sue and get much back.

There's tons of banks/CC companies that are advertising Apple Pay. It is actually annoying for me as their customer and shareholder, since they are spending money on advertising someone else's product.

Near-BK or BK situations can yield 100 baggers. E.g. Fannie/Freddie common/prefs could be 100 bagger from $0.3 prices (prices are higher now). There were energy/bank X0 (perhaps not 100, but 20-50) baggers coming out of 2009. Of course, options is another place where 100 bagger can happen. Biotechs - which are kind-of near-BK/option situations. But lottery is the best for 1000+ baggers ;D

I think there's a lot of confirmation bias when looking back and saying "yeah, I knew the guy was no good". I seem to remember a very positive interview with him some time ago and I don't think interviewer or any listeners having reservations. I doubt I'd have invested in his companies simply because I mostly don't invest in companies that are losing money. But I doubt I could have called his collapse.

Assuming cost at ~$5, possible gain to $50 and possible loss to zero, the probability of success has to be higher than XX% (I intentionally did not write a value 8)) for the investment in prefs to have a positive expected return. As it is known, humans are notoriously bad in guessing probabilities of events. However, it would be interesting to hear what probability do people assign for the successful outcome? :) Possibly someone should create a poll. :) I did not write down the value of XX to avoid anchoring. As soon as I write it down, everyone will pretty much anchor to it. ;) So to be unbiased - haha - this is simple calc and some people can probably do it in their heads - perhaps we should not disclose XX before getting some probability guesses. :)

Who are we to judge his quality of life and call it a "sacrifice"? If he decided to chop wood and carry water, that's his choice. We can only thank him for the contribution to his community. Rest in peace.

Apparently your thoughts are quite popular. The problem is that if EU falls apart, Europe is finished. EU was and is the best future Europe could have. If EU falls apart, Europe will become a patchwork of squabbling, nationalist has-beens with no global weight, overpriced workforce, and pretty much the same amount of bureaucracy as in EU if not worse. United Europe is the only way out for the old continent. But it's understandable that in bad economic times people go back to outdated insular nationalistic worldviews. I was really happy with everything EU achieved. I did not think it was possible. The last 30-so years were the greatest in the history of Europe. Too bad it might end badly. Europositive and proud of it.

You've got Buffett's endorsement: http://video.foxbusiness.com/v/4032461248001/buffett-on-coca-cola/?playlist_id=1866680862001#sp=show-clips Congrats! 8) I still wouldn't buy here, since I think the easy money has been made and it's not cheap here. Personally I won't pay 18x forward earnings even for a great business. But you might do well. Good luck

Insurers exclude acts of war from policies. There are other issues with Ukrainian businesses though. Like currency devaluation and sovereign default risk. I liked the black humor netnet's observation though.

I agree with Constructive: Watsa better have plan B up his sleeve, since Greece is likely to default and leave euro. I'd say the chance of default is above 30% right now. The chance of leaving euro is a bit lower, since they could theoretically - though unlikely - default and stay. Disclosure: I do have a large position in Fairfax.

I did not read the crap article OP linked to (I glanced at first page, it was enough to vomit... a bit). Buffett does talk his own book sometimes and he's definitely not an avuncular Santa that is his public image. In some cases he's nice (or pretends to be nice), in some cases he's ruthless. He's also sometimes weird. Sometimes wrong - about inflation for 20+ years. :) In summary, he's human and that's pretty much it. :) Talking about genius: he routinely understates his IQ and overall intelligence. So his claims that investing results are not due to high IQ should be taken with a big spoon of salt.

Did you buy AIRT and ISIG with Biglari? ;)

Close, but actually: Shake Shack by Biglari!

Is that what I think it is? Large iOn Collider? Once they ramp up the energy, we all gonna be sucked into a black hole. 8)

I wouldn't invest in FAIRX because of its Fannie/Freddie positions. For me the investment manager should work on investing instead of trying to make money in lawsuits. (I also believe these lawsuits are stupid, but that's off topic here and I won't post on it more - although Fannie/Freddie bulls are likely to gank up on me :))

I for one welcome our new autonomous overlords.

It looks like Buffett has been selling on and off 5%-10% of his position here and there. And it has been somewhat constant since 2009 - not a single big sale, but piecemeal. What do you think? It's very hard to understand why he's doing it this way. Of course, he made money by not dumping the whole position in 2009-2010, but he also lost money through the sales so far. Or looking another way: why do you think you have a better handle on this than Buffett who has been a seller so far?

This is the Buffett who replaced two CEOs of KO in backroom deals when they run KO crappily. Apparently he's not so tolerant for idiots running a wonderful business. Buffett's quotes are nice soundbytes, but you are not Buffett, so at best you can hope that he will do the heavy lifting for you in this case if the sales continue to collapse. Good luck. :) Edit: BTW, I don't believe that IBM is a business so wonderful that an idiot can run it. I also don't believe that Ginny Rometty is an idiot. I don't like her aggressive push of IBM, but she's not an idiot. Whether she's a good CEO is still an open question IMHO.

This sounds more like Elon Musk than like Tim Cook. :) They could build a base on the Moon and tell the US: "iMoon U". As RAH wrote about long ago, once you have a base on the moon you can threaten to throw big rocks down the well. Yes, that's the reference. :) You may know that Elon has Lady Vivamus: http://www.heinleinprize.com/2011/07/heinlein-prize-2011-awarded-to-elon-musk/

This sounds more like Elon Musk than like Tim Cook. :) They could build a base on the Moon and tell the US: "iMoon U".

I listened to couple of Ginny interviews/talks and I got out feeling that she's one of these CEOs that are constantly mind-f*(&*(ing their audience. I guess most of CEOs are doing this, but with the good ones you don't feel it. With Ginny you do. Oh the constant repetition of "big data, analytics, cloud, security". And "Engage! engage, engage". I'd be more happy if IBM had Satya Nadella or Larry Ellison at the helm. I might be wrong though. :) Anyway, this doesn't mean IBM is/is not a buy. For me, it continues to be in the too hard pile. I'm pretty sure that in two years either bulls or bears will be saying "I told you so", but I am not sure which ones it will be.

If the CEO is sitting in an office waiting for the phone to ring, don't invest into his company. ;D Honestly, I'm not a CEO, but I know how busy our managers are and the VP level management too. So unless the CEO is a dunce, he's not sitting in an office waiting to talk to you. Maybe it's different in other industries. It might be cultural thing too. Maybe Americans love this. If someone asked me the questions you suggested, I'd tell them that they are wasting my time and to go bother someone else. :) (Yeah, and here I'm on the internet forum wasting my time without anyone even asking, oh, the irony :)). Anyway, I said, go ahead and do it if you are a person who likes doing it and sees a benefit in it.