There's zero evidence to suggest Beanie Babies are not going to continue upward. Anyone who knows the first thing about Beanie Babies already knows about the bear market. It's not a surprise. Beanie Baby investors tend to have outlooks that see farther out than the next quarter.

We are not slow, we are just "bubble-aware".

> USENET was never this bad

Um, not sure I concur. I encountered nasty trolls and doxing there.

If we start losing a war we will resemble them.

...paid off. Our Bribeocracy in action.

OK, good idea. What do you propose?

True, but couldn't we at least wait until we get the data for the full year before sending out a press release, instead of anticipating what the result is going to be?

What's the rush to get this non-news out in December?

Yes it was. That's why USENET invented moderation. The unmoderated forums were pretty horrific sometimes.

The one thing about USENET, though, is that the trolls and flamers and a$$holes were actual humans, not troll farms or click-farmers or AIs.

Given the boom and bust cycle of fads like this, you also might not want to best they will,

Absolutely agree. I wouldn't bet either way, but I might bet on the company's ability to make the right bet.

In general, there are very few collectibles that can beat an index fund for returns. Those that do tend to do so because some particular instance had some association with someone famous, which means you're not ordering it from Amazon.

It is much easier to choose an index fund than guess which detritus will sell like Paul Newman's Rolex and acquire it before someone else.

30 years ago it was Beanie Babies.

I recall seeing infomercials selling "investing guides" for which dolls you should horde.

Hint: if the value of something hinges on the fact that the factory only goes so fast, you might not want to bet the retirement on them not spinning up another factory.

Ay Ay...

Now I interview graduates who canâ(TM)t explain what a HAVING clause does in SQL

I avoid using HAVING when possible, it's screwy to troubleshoot, especially when dealing with nulls. Instead I break the query into multiple sub-queries (CTEs) via WITH statements.

That's DOGE's side of the story. Many employees found out they had to use their personal card for work travel and then file paperwork for reimbursement. That extra paperwork is created and processed on tax-payer's dime.

Cut-first-and-think-later...or quit.

If the crypto pop coincides with the AI pop, 1930's 2.0.

...cheap Russian oil. Profit!