SERVING THE QUANTITATIVE FINANCE COMMUNITY

 
User avatar
Collector
Posts: 3838
Joined: August 21st, 2001, 12:37 pm

Re: Stupid question of the day

September 13th, 2018, 1:44 pm

exactly why I asked Mr. Majordomo to bring u the oat milk, instead of me. The attack from your cats predictable, they are meat eaters after all (starved on oat milk). But even Mr. Majordomo did not buy into it. 
 
User avatar
Cuchulainn
Posts: 56683
Joined: July 16th, 2004, 7:38 am
Location: Amsterdam
Contact:

Re: Stupid question of the day

September 13th, 2018, 4:11 pm

Why would three Irish republicans go to one of the most dangerous countries on earth, travelling on false passports into the stronghold of a guerrilla group notorious for kidnapping, drug trafficking and murder?

It is a question the three defendants will attempt to answer at their trial in Colombia, but one which has provided untold anguish and embarrassment for Sinn Fein and considerable anger for the White House. There may be a simple explanation. They might have been there as "eco-tourists" (the first explanation offered) or to study the Colombian peace process (the subsequent explanation). The notion of convicted terrorists James Monaghan and Martin McAuley chasing butterflies in the jungle is charming. But am I alone in wondering if it is true?
 
User avatar
Collector
Posts: 3838
Joined: August 21st, 2001, 12:37 pm

Re: Stupid question of the day

September 13th, 2018, 4:34 pm

"chasing butterflies in the jungle is charming"

butterfly effects? has anyone ever predicted a storm based on the flap of a wing by a butterfly?

"Irish republicans" looking for Democrats?
 
User avatar
ppauper
Posts: 68468
Joined: November 15th, 2001, 1:29 pm

Re: Stupid question of the day

September 13th, 2018, 5:00 pm

Cuchulainn wrote:
They might have been there as "eco-tourists" (the first explanation offered) or to study the Colombian peace process (the subsequent explanation).

if they offered one benign explanation and then retracted it and offered a second equally benign explanation, then neither is true.
 
User avatar
Cuchulainn
Posts: 56683
Joined: July 16th, 2004, 7:38 am
Location: Amsterdam
Contact:

Re: Stupid question of the day

September 13th, 2018, 5:36 pm

ppauper wrote:
Cuchulainn wrote:
They might have been there as "eco-tourists" (the first explanation offered) or to study the Colombian peace process (the subsequent explanation).

if they offered one benign explanation and then retracted it and offered a second equally benign explanation, then neither is true.

One was a biologist, the other a social anthropologist.
 
User avatar
Cuchulainn
Posts: 56683
Joined: July 16th, 2004, 7:38 am
Location: Amsterdam
Contact:

Re: Stupid question of the day

September 13th, 2018, 8:21 pm

Now absorbing is 100% clear [$]p_{ii} = 1[$]. All the rest 0. Nowhere to run, nowhere to hide,
ABOUT WILMOTT

PW by JB

Wilmott.com has been "Serving the Quantitative Finance Community" since 2001. Continued...


JOBS BOARD

JOBS BOARD

Looking for a quant job, risk, algo trading,...? Browse jobs here...