[HN Gopher] How Covid brought the future back
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       How Covid brought the future back
        
       Author : furtively
       Score  : 106 points
       Date   : 2021-02-12 17:58 UTC (1 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (worksinprogress.co)
 (TXT) w3m dump (worksinprogress.co)
        
       | jgalt212 wrote:
       | > That's partly an artifact of how policymakers responded to the
       | pandemic; pumping liquidity into the market
       | 
       | I think he should say _mostly_. Fed balance sheet growth has been
       | unprecendented and those folks who have not lost their jobs and
       | are no longer spending on tourism are dumping their USG direct
       | payments into Robinhood.
        
       | _hzw wrote:
       | For me the real "future" covid has already brought is contactless
       | payment, as least in Germany. I know it is not a new thing, but
       | before the first lockdown in March last year, some vendors I
       | frequented didn't even have a POS terminals, some had one but
       | without contactless function. Fastforward to present time, I can
       | pay everywhere I go with just my phone. What a change!
        
         | blackrock wrote:
         | The only problem is that you must touch the grimy touchscreen
         | terminal to give or deny a gratuity. The same touchscreen
         | terminal that the last 500 people touched, and nobody has yet
         | cleaned.
        
           | kwhitefoot wrote:
           | No you don't. Not in Europe, mostly anyway.
        
         | ls612 wrote:
         | I loved when I visited Australia that literally everywhere took
         | Apple Pay, I definitely hope that trend comes to America and
         | the rest of the world
        
       | Animats wrote:
       | _In fact, some economists continued to argue after 2000 that
       | "bubble" is a meaningless category._
       | 
       | Uh oh.
       | 
       | "Stocks have reached a permanently high plateau" - Irving Fisher,
       | economist, early October 1929.
        
         | anonisko wrote:
         | There is something different this time.
         | 
         | People en masse have started using the S&P 500 and other index
         | funds as a long term store of value. Large amounts of money buy
         | these stocks every pay period with zero regard to performance
         | or current market conditions.
         | 
         | As far as I'm aware, this has never happened before. We don't
         | know how this experiment will change the market long term or
         | whether it will eventually collapse.
        
           | cblconfederate wrote:
           | > a long term store of value
           | 
           | Or a short term way to escape moneyprinting and inflation
           | until the rates become sane.
        
           | pm90 wrote:
           | You're absolutely right, its not the same and it will likely
           | fail in ways we can't predict just yet.
           | 
           | The 2008 crisis taught the US Federal Reserve how to respond
           | to an economic crisis effectively, and they've been pretty
           | successful at managing the current one. Note that Fed's main
           | concerns are macroeconomic, so their assistance necessarily
           | goes mostly to larger corporations and financial
           | institutions, which seem to be doing OK (smaller businesses
           | are suffering, but Congress stepped in for them... somewhat).
           | I don't anticipate a liquidity shortage-triggered panic +
           | recession like 2008.
           | 
           | However, all asset prices seem to be inflated. Real estate,
           | crypto, stocks... all going up and up. They can't do so
           | forever, it will be interesting to see how it fails this
           | time.
        
             | Animats wrote:
             | _You 're absolutely right, its not the same and it will
             | likely fail in ways we can't predict just yet._
             | 
             | Yes. We haven't yet had a bubble collapse in a time of zero
             | or negative real interest rates. When it happens, cutting
             | interest rates will not be an option. That option has been
             | used up.
        
               | anonisko wrote:
               | Like a junkie chasing that first high. You keep needing
               | more and more but never get close to the first, until
               | suddenly you wake up and realizing your life collapsed
               | around you and your drug doesn't work at all anymore.
        
             | vmception wrote:
             | When you tie pricing metrics to interest rates, they are
             | either not inflated or not that inflated.
             | 
             | You have to account for the amount of money in the system
             | and how that money seeks to beat inflation.
             | 
             | You can't just pick up 40-year old chart analysis books and
             | say "aha the P/E ratio for this sector is higher than
             | normal", it is all part of an ecosystem.
             | 
             | The macroeconomic policy is going to be a greater influence
             | than any chart-based psychology proxy or seeing how many
             | essential workers are talking about investing their spare
             | change.
             | 
             | Right now, more money is going to be created or distributed
             | in the trillions. If the Central Banks are instructed to be
             | involved, or chose to be involved, their method of getting
             | new money into the market will be by purchasing more bonds
             | which pushes interest rates even lower.
             | 
             | The only thing this didn't predict were new ephemeral asset
             | classes, crypto. That people are opting to buy.
        
           | jasonkester wrote:
           | _As far as I 'm aware, this has never happened before_
           | 
           | No worries. We can fix that.
           | 
           | I first heard the argument you made used to explain why the
           | market would continue to go up indefinitely in the late 90's.
           | 
           | But that's only because I was old enough to pay attention
           | then. I don't doubt in the least that it was used in the 80's
           | as well.
        
           | ivanche wrote:
           | > _There is something different this time._
           | 
           | Do you know which are the 4 most expensive words in English?
           | "This time it's different."
        
           | rsynnott wrote:
           | > There is something different this time.
           | 
           | There always is. And then, abruptly, there isn't anymore.
        
           | baxtr wrote:
           | It's different every time, isn't it? World War II was
           | different, the oil crisis in the 70s was different, debt in
           | the 80s, doctom bubble in the 90s, the financial crisis was
           | really different, and now this pandemic and the sheer volumes
           | of money. It's different every time, but economic growth has
           | been a constant and tied to this are ultimately the prices of
           | securities. That's not gonna be different. So it's a very
           | sane choice to invest in a broad ETF eg based on the S&P.
        
             | CuriouslyC wrote:
             | Index funds are a good, safe set and forget option. In
             | boring times, the performance is not much worse and even
             | sometimes better. In times of upheaval though, the high
             | volatility makes active trading MUCH more profitable.
        
               | baxtr wrote:
               | Absolutely. At the same time it's also much riskier.
        
               | jfengel wrote:
               | At least, they always have been. With many people pouring
               | money into them solely because they're "safe", it's
               | possible that they have managed to turn a safe investment
               | into a risky one,a la mortgages in the 2000s.
               | 
               | Currently the S&P 500 has a P/E of 40, a number it
               | historically hits before crashes. Of course the pandemic
               | makes that figure less meaningful long term than it
               | already is, but even before the pandemic it was well
               | above a justified level.
               | 
               | I have no better advice for people. I have theories on
               | why it's overpriced, but I am also invested in broad
               | indexes for lack of a better idea. But it may just be
               | that the long-standing advice has become dated.
        
               | alisonkisk wrote:
               | Equities are a good investment because that's where
               | government bailout money goes. Until one day it stops or
               | until enough rich/richish people try to sell equities for
               | consumption it real assets (like building a house) and
               | then the bottom falls out.
        
               | jfk13 wrote:
               | > high volatility makes active trading MUCH more
               | profitable
               | 
               | Or much more loss-making, depending how lucky you are.
        
         | renewiltord wrote:
         | I've been listening to people say this "uh oh" since 2009. I
         | think literally every year. Not a single year has gone by when
         | someone doesn't "uh oh" and post something about turkeys at
         | Thanksgiving.
        
           | shortandsweet wrote:
           | The turkey is good for the Thanksgiving day host and guests.
           | Just figure out a way to not be the turkey. There's always a
           | winner or loser, rarely everyone loses. Diversity is key.
        
           | alisonkisk wrote:
           | That's the boom/bust cycle. Bubble inflates until it pops. We
           | can't have 0 interested and equity prices growing faster than
           | the underlying businesses. Once labor runs out of money for
           | rent-seekers to extract without killing them, it's over.
        
           | PixyMisa wrote:
           | The people who predicted 17 out of the last 3 recessions are
           | still less wrong than the ones who think there will never be
           | another recession. Just wrong more often.
        
             | ls612 wrote:
             | They both have precisely the same amount of signal, ie
             | none. One just unconditionally predicts a recession and the
             | other unconditionally predicts good times.
        
       | maxidog wrote:
       | 6% return peak bubble to peak bubble is in no way reassuring.
        
       | revscat wrote:
       | This is trash. If there is a point, the author does not seem to
       | know how to get to it, nor support it.
        
       | cblconfederate wrote:
       | > a striking rise in investor interest in electric vehicles,
       | autonomous cars, AI, and software companies ranging from
       | consumer-facing companies like Facebook and Google to complex
       | enterprise products like Snowflake
       | 
       | ... Or, a striking rise in investing in whatever the mob thinks
       | will make money, even when it is not, from tesla to bitcoin. If
       | they were investing in the future they 'd be investing in ModeRNA
       | / Biontech
        
         | starfallg wrote:
         | I agree, that is such a bad take. And the reason we have a
         | renewed asset bubble in the midst of a unprecedented economic
         | contraction is purely because of stimulus and QE.
        
         | renewiltord wrote:
         | Well, they did that too...
        
           | cblconfederate wrote:
           | Saving the world economy from a pandemic and creating the
           | equivalent of a vaccine printer = 2x their stock price. If
           | anything i d say investors are being pessimistic
        
             | alisonkisk wrote:
             | Or they realize that the vaccine is temporary and vaccine
             | companies aren't able to extract rent from saving the
             | economy, due to either competition or government/social
             | pressure.
        
               | [deleted]
        
           | Slartie wrote:
           | But those stocks' rises pale in comparison to the rises of
           | some of the aforementioned securities - particularly Tesla.
           | 
           | BioNTech/Moderna are poised to income streams of billions of
           | $ through guaranteed sales, with the very real possibility of
           | more to come if either revaccination is necessary or there
           | are more applications for the mRNA technology.
           | 
           | With that in mind, they are quite conservatively valued by
           | the market right now.
        
             | A12-B wrote:
             | Moderna has not been distributing its vaccines fast enough
             | internationally. There is a timer to these things you know,
             | because the virus can mutate more. For that reason I'd
             | rather put my investment in 3D printing or something.
        
               | cblconfederate wrote:
               | OTOH the mRNA vaxs can mutate as fast as the virus.
        
               | Slartie wrote:
               | It's a weekend of work to change the spike mRNA in both
               | mRNA vaccines to accommodate a new virus mutation. An
               | additional 4-5 weeks for production to take this new
               | formulation from code to finished vaccine. So in a matter
               | of 6 weeks total, a variant can be countered by a new
               | vaccine variant, if necessary.
               | 
               | Since the results of the regulatory tests and safety and
               | efficacy validations can mostly be transferred for slight
               | vaccine modifications (at least that's my state of
               | knowledge), a variation should not have to go through the
               | entire chain of test phases again before it can be
               | cleared for use.
               | 
               | If anything, the prospect of mutations can only be seen
               | as a significant moat for mRNA vaccine manufacturers,
               | because their technology is the fastest when it comes to
               | such adaptions.
        
               | jfk13 wrote:
               | > Since the results of the regulatory tests and safety
               | and efficacy validations can mostly be transferred for
               | slight vaccine modifications
               | 
               | Is that kinda like saying the 737-MAX wasn't really a new
               | type of plane?
        
         | jimbob45 wrote:
         | In fairness, electric cars are the future and everyone knows
         | it. Sure, the company Tesla may not be the exact one to steer
         | the ship in 20 years, but it's not like we're backing zeppelins
         | here.
        
           | cblconfederate wrote:
           | Electrification of cars does not justify trillion dollar
           | investment. It's already a solved problem, it needs
           | incremental investment to scale horizontally. Making the cars
           | and the charger network is the kind of thing that is easily
           | commodified and outsourced. The more challenging problem will
           | be to provide adequate electricity for the cars.
           | 
           | Self-driving is a pipe-dream and a marketing vehicle, not
           | gonna happen anytime soon.
        
             | fiachamp wrote:
             | Maybe a solar and energy storage investment would help...
        
         | 0x008 wrote:
         | The biotech sector actually outperformed the tech sector last
         | year.
        
         | A12-B wrote:
         | Why is everything a large group of people do collectively
         | called a 'mob' these days, for everything? Is no one allowed to
         | do things together anymore without being chastised?
        
           | gremlinsinc wrote:
           | >Why is everything a large group of people do collectively
           | called a 'mob' these days?
           | 
           | These days? It's always been thus.
           | 
           | The Roman Poet Juvenal who said:
           | 
           | "It is all too easy to fall from power - like Sejanus. The
           | mob follows Fortuna and cares for nothing but bread and
           | circuses." (Circuses can also be games, or in modern times
           | TV, Games, Netflix, Reddit, etc...).
           | 
           | You ever see Gladiator?
           | 
           | Lucilla: "The gods have spared you. Today I saw a slave
           | become more powerful than the Emperor of Rome."
           | 
           | Maximus: "The gods have spared me? I am at their mercy, with
           | the power only to amuse a mob!"
           | 
           | Lucilla: "That is power. The mob is Rome. And while Commodus
           | controls them he controls everything."
           | 
           | We have a literal cult controlling at least 40% of the minds
           | of the USA (QAnon). A literal mob almost led a successful
           | insurrection. (If they were more organized, they would've had
           | a higher body count).
           | 
           | A literal mob, possibly manipulated by finance majors
           | orchestrated a pump-and-dump under the guise of "stick it to
           | the man", just disrupted wallstreet in a pretty spectacular
           | way. Sure, they did stick it to the man, for a bit - but I'm
           | sure a lot of people also lost their ass on this.
           | 
           | In a mob there's a bunch of people who basically just are
           | following a fluid current in history, most are unaware as to
           | why and the best answer is probably: "I wasn't doing anything
           | else, so why not?", or "So and so told me, and I trust them"
           | and often that trust is mis-placed, like believing a
           | highschool dropout's opinion on climate change instead of the
           | consensus by 90%+ of the leading scientists across the globe.
        
             | sawjet wrote:
             | You really think that 40% of people are being controlled by
             | an internet troll?
        
               | alisonkisk wrote:
               | 40% say that Trump won the election. It will take a
               | couple of years to see how many people are QAnon/Trump
               | zealots and how many are Republicans held hostage while
               | waiting for someone to viably step up.
               | 
               | But for now, it's 40% that's a mix of cultists and people
               | who act like cultists for the time being.
        
             | qanonta02512591 wrote:
             | If you honestly think that Trump lost the election, then
             | you're either not very bright, or you simply haven't been
             | paying attention.
             | 
             | QAnon has nothing whatsoever to do with this.
        
           | cblconfederate wrote:
           | because mobs act impulsively and blindly follow the leaders
        
             | alisonkisk wrote:
             | Not the leaders directly; the mob follows each other.
        
       | DoctorNick wrote:
       | If "The Future" is widespread poverty and massive inequality,
       | then sure.
        
       | etherio wrote:
       | This article seems a bit disjointed and ambling.
       | 
       | Can we also argue that this surge of investment is correlated to
       | people staying at home and thus having more money to spend that
       | would have been used on food, entertainment, etc... ?
       | 
       | Im not sure whether or not this is correct considering the
       | negative economic effects of covid for many people, but it might
       | have caused a surge in investing for a certain deomographic.
        
         | Izkata wrote:
         | Consider the situation in the US:
         | 
         | Unemployment spiked from 4% to 14% yes, but on the flipside,
         | what about the 80% or so that didn't lose their jobs? We still
         | got stimulus checks, while paying less for entertainment and
         | transportation (if we could work from home). What else to do
         | with that extra money? Put it in GameStop, perhaps?
        
       | PeterWhittaker wrote:
       | There seem to be three main hypotheses in this article, and all
       | seem wrong to me.
       | 
       | The first, raised in the context of development of the transistor
       | and how it was stalled by WW2, is some notion of "future
       | improvement motivation". The author suggests that the transistor
       | came about because the people involved wanted to improve the
       | future.
       | 
       | I'd assert that the people involved wanted to improve switching
       | speeds and reduce power requirements, and were driven by
       | curiosity. That they changed the world was a side effect. A big
       | one, but unintentional.
       | 
       | The second notion is bound into the idea of people being
       | optimistic about the future and taking as its evidence that
       | people are "investing" for future growth.
       | 
       | My take? A lot of people are afraid and uncertain and are looking
       | desperately for a short term windfall, and some people fear they
       | won't have a job in X years so they might as well plow their
       | money into whatever is rising.
       | 
       | The author's position requires rational investors. We know the
       | rational agent model is bunk.
       | 
       | The third questionable idea is that somehow the plague gave us
       | usable time and that people are using this to their advantage.
       | Sure, some may be, but most of us got anxiety, longer hours
       | because work was more accessible (just down the hall) AND a
       | refuge from plague fear and future fear and bad news, et al, etc.
       | 
       | What the author writes may be true for a small fraction of us.
       | But not for most/all.
       | 
       | The term bubble may best describe where the author lives: in an
       | optimistic, future-looking, rational place. Many of us may hope
       | to live there, few of us do.
        
         | TomMasz wrote:
         | Post-WWII R&D was vastly different from what R&D is like now.
         | No one is funding research that isn't directly product-related
         | or with an unclear or long-term ROI like that anymore. There
         | never will be a Bell Labs or PARC every again. Incremental
         | improvements are the future now.
        
       | CryptoPunk wrote:
       | COVID made people appreciate the value of technology.
       | 
       | For example, autonomous vehicles, whether automobiles or drones,
       | take on much greater importance when much of the population is
       | restricted to their homes and needs goods delivered, preferrably
       | without interacting with a human.
       | 
       | Machine learning goes from a technology that can make our lives
       | more comfortable and improve the bottom line, to one that can end
       | a global catastophe.
       | 
       | Ending regulatory morass goes from a theoretical interest in the
       | pursuit of abstract GDP growth statistics, to an imperative to
       | prevent any future repetitions of the six week delay in COVID
       | testing caused by the FDA at the outset of the pandemic in the US
       | [1], or the regulatory delays in making available low-
       | cost/makeshift ventilators, rapid at-home COVID tests, etc.
       | 
       | [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/10/us/coronavirus-testing-
       | de...
        
       | croes wrote:
       | Strange, I think the opposite. All this technology and obe simple
       | virus brings the world to a stop. Yes, multiple vaccines were
       | developed pretty fast but it remains to be seen whether we can
       | vaccinate faster than the virus mutates. Not to mention that I
       | underestimated the amount of idiots in humanity. Similar patterns
       | to climate change deniers. There is no virus, there is one but it
       | is harmless, it is not harmless but you can't do anything about
       | it.
        
       | gchokov wrote:
       | This article is all over the place. The author starts with some
       | history on how crisis and necessity for better life brings ideas
       | to life, and then half the article is defending his view on the
       | TSLA stock.
       | 
       | Apart from this, yes ,it's cleat that a crisis is a terrible
       | thing to waste, and companies are forced to innovate as the
       | current struggles provide them opportunities to shine.
        
         | baxtr wrote:
         | So maybe a showcase that a great combination of words in a
         | title is enough to generate upvotes?
        
           | wyozi wrote:
           | Interesting observation. I wonder if the number of upvotes
           | depends more on the quality of the article or the quality of
           | comments. I have to admit that even here, I personally didn't
           | even open the article but rather went straight to the
           | comments.
        
         | netflixandkill wrote:
         | Indeed. I mean, I own Telsa stock, so I'm not unhappy about
         | what it's doing, but I'm not about to invent reasons why it
         | makes sense. Eventually the major manufacturers like Toyota and
         | VW are going to pivot and Tesla is going to be an entertaining
         | footnote of daring that paid off ... in past tense.
        
           | achenatx wrote:
           | The brand is incredibly strong. It wont become a footnote. At
           | this point they will make it standalone or be purchased by
           | another company. I dont think fading away into obscurity is
           | in the cards.
        
             | vagrantJin wrote:
             | That's fanboyism.
             | 
             | Most places on the world dont have the infrastructure for
             | electric cars yet.
             | 
             | But I'll be damned if you won't find a Toyota Hilux in the
             | most backwater village behind a mountain range.
             | 
             | I know a vast majority of people of my friend group who
             | aren't in tech have no idea about tesla and at best have
             | heard the name _something something electric car something
             | something Elon Musk_
             | 
             | Compared to VW or Toyota - who shift millions of units in
             | every concievable market - Tesla is just a cute curiosity
             | like the carmakers of the 20s.
        
               | hakfoo wrote:
               | What's odd is that there's a fairly strong sentiment that
               | EVs are the future, but some of the existing automakers
               | seem to still be covering their ears and singing.
               | 
               | If Tesla starts suffering mortal market-share wounds,
               | they will still be a compelling acquisition target for
               | one of the existing automakers who are late to the EV
               | party-- you get a ready-made bag of patents, supply
               | chain, and designs. You can immediately start building a
               | Model 3 with an Acura or Chrysler badge, and you've got
               | something to ship to dealers in countries with punitive
               | tax regime or ban on gas cars, and a few more years
               | runway to fully adapt the design into a full full own-
               | brand EV.
        
               | repsilat wrote:
               | > _some of the existing automakers seem to still be
               | covering their ears and singing_
               | 
               | Some, but the more common story is "traditional automaker
               | pouring billions into EV production to make up for lost
               | time."
               | 
               | > _If Tesla starts suffering mortal market-share wounds,
               | they will still be a compelling acquisition target_
               | 
               | More importantly they'd need to suffer mortal market
               | _cap_ wounds. At anything like current prices they 're
               | not only dreadful value, they're simply unaffordable. At
               | the moment Tesla buying a large traditional automaker is
               | more likely than the reverse (though maybe not likely in
               | an absolute sense.)
        
       | Hypocritelefty wrote:
       | Wonder why anything and everything on tesla makes it to the front
       | page.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-02-13 23:01 UTC)