Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2019 May 6
| Miscellaneous desk | ||
|---|---|---|
| < May 5 | << Apr | May | Jun >> | Current desk > |
| Welcome to the Wikipedia Miscellaneous Reference Desk Archives |
|---|
| The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages. |
May 6
editPeer to Peer Spreadsheet reference data
editExample: I have a simple NUMBERS (or EXCEL or ...) spreadsheet which presently contains cells with web hyperlinks to information sources. The subject of the sheet could be "Efficient Homes", and the links are to pages such as:
DualFlush ToiletSink LEDDimmers 12VoltSystem CarBackup 3rdGenSolar HomeControl AltEnergy ElectricitySellBack WhiskBrooms
I would like to offer this to the general public for use and editing, where additional information web sites could be added. Abuse being accomplished using a similar review and control as you provide with Wikipedia pages.
Additional sheets could be added to provide links to other subjects. Spreadsheet manipulation instructions would be provided to accomplish simple editing actions.
My Question: Do you or do you know of others who provide a platform for accomplishing the "living" information source source as i've described?
- If you put it on Google Sheets, you can allow anybody access to it by publishing the link. You could make it world-readable, and have a mechanism whereby you could grant editing rights. --ColinFine (talk) 18:42, 6 May 2019 (UTC)
Scams or not?
editFacebook seems to be rife with sponsored advertisements claiming "Invest in BitCoin Code and you'll be rich!" and "Install this ForEx trading robot and you'll be rich!"
The websites the advertisements link to seem impressive, but all this seems to scream "SCAM!" at me. They seem to be little more than an advanced form of the Nigerian scam, where you "invest" money in hopes of a profit you'll never see.
Are they really all scams or not? JIP | Talk 21:12, 6 May 2019 (UTC)
- Of course they're all scams. The question is which variety. There are companies that actually do invest your money (with a healthy overhead), but are just completely lying about how much profit (or loss, more likely) you stand to make; and then there are companies that just take your money and run; and yet worse are companies that take your money, steal your credit card and identity, maybe even plant malware on your computer, and then run. According to [1], all of the above are happening. See also [2], and there are lots of stories about individual scammers such as [3]. Facebook apparently thinks there is such a thing as a legitimate version of these products [4], and is trying to prevent their advertisement without some kind of registration, but scammers are able to get through by exploiting holes in the advertising filters. It seems doubtful that the uninitiated would be able to tell the difference between a genuine company and a scam, aside from the general "anyone promising to make you rich is lying". Someguy1221 (talk) 21:24, 6 May 2019 (UTC)
- One modification, it's "anyone promising to make you rich quickly is lying". To the contrary, it's quite easy to make you rich over decades, say if you invest $100 from each paycheck and invest it in a stock-market index fund. SinisterLefty (talk) 21:43, 6 May 2019 (UTC)
- Well, for any meaning of rich. If you did the above plan, you'd be "comfortably middle class". To be stupidly rich, you mostly either need to a) inherit your money from your parents or b) leverage the ownership of a business (with people working for you) into generating wealth for you. Option b is difficult without option a, though on a "winning the lottery" level, possible. Per this calculator, working with your values of $100 per month and the average S&P growth rate of 10% (see https://www.nerd wallet.com/blog/investing/average-stock-market-return/ take away space; it's blacklisted), compounding monthly, we get a nice $637,678.02 after 40 years, which is about the average time a person works a full-time job (from mid 20s to mid 60s). Now, you're in your mid 60s, when most people retire and start living off of that. It's enough to be comfortable, but not "rich". To get multi-millionaire rich, or billionaire rich, the two tried methods of "have rich parents" and "own massive businesses with other people work for you and make you lots of money" work far better. --Jayron32 12:38, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
- If your spouse did the same as you, then you'd be at a million and a quarter. If in the US, you can add in Social Security payments, and maybe pensions. If you also own your own home by then, your living expenses should be modest. So, that could make for quite a nice bonus on top of your daily living expenses. And the growth doesn't need to stop there, as you can keep the bulk of that money invested after retirement. SinisterLefty (talk) 21:10, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
- Maintaining a middle-class lifestyle in retirement requires about $1million in savings and/or continued earning potential. Some sharing of expenses with a spouse helps, but again, and extra quarter million beyond maintenance is not rich. Insisting that "having enough money to pay bills and not starve and still have a little left over for vacations" is somehow the same as "yachts and mansions and garages full of Ferraris" is disingenuous. Properly saving as you describe is what is needed for a person to maintain comfort, not become rich. There's orders of magnitude differences here. --Jayron32 22:07, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
- Or option c, which is a catch all for athletes, entertainers, and the like. It's remarkably easy to become a multi-millionaire provided you can hit a baseball or emote convincingly. Matt Deres (talk) 15:30, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
- It's remarkably difficult to hit a baseball well and consistently. If everyone could do it, it wouldn't pay so well. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 18:27, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
- I never said those activites were easy. I said it was easy to become a millionaire if you can do them well. Matt Deres (talk) 00:24, 8 May 2019 (UTC)
- Even so, it's still about as likely as winning a lottery even for people who are good at those things. I've known many fantastic musicians, athletes, etc. who never had the chance to be rich. Having such a skill is a useful, but by no means sufficient, part of becoming rich by being an entertainer of some sort. --Jayron32 10:40, 8 May 2019 (UTC)
- I never said those activites were easy. I said it was easy to become a millionaire if you can do them well. Matt Deres (talk) 00:24, 8 May 2019 (UTC)
- It's remarkably difficult to hit a baseball well and consistently. If everyone could do it, it wouldn't pay so well. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 18:27, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
- If your spouse did the same as you, then you'd be at a million and a quarter. If in the US, you can add in Social Security payments, and maybe pensions. If you also own your own home by then, your living expenses should be modest. So, that could make for quite a nice bonus on top of your daily living expenses. And the growth doesn't need to stop there, as you can keep the bulk of that money invested after retirement. SinisterLefty (talk) 21:10, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
- A lot of these are only slightly more sophisticated versions of the old joke, "Send me a dollar and I'll tell you how I make money!" ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 23:43, 6 May 2019 (UTC)
- Add God, and you've got a religion. Iapetus (talk) 09:13, 7 May 2019 (UTC)