@FD1000 - everything you say makes sense, but the sheer volume of data that is capable of being managed by companies (of all sorts) is increasing exponentially. And, I have to imagine that in short order the types of data that do much of the heavy lifting in forecasting and prediction (i.e., account for 98% of the variance) will be settled upon. So, gaining access to that last 1.5-2% isn't going to move the needle much for many investors. Or maybe imperfect data can be overcome with a super-rich model (as Bayesian maven Gelman says "Big Data Need Big Model").
Now, I guess the counterpoint would be that if JPM, DE Shaw, GS, and kindred competitors spend gazillions of dollars shaving 1/1000000th of a nanosecond off a trade execution time, they might find a way to convert that 1.5% information edge into some real money. I don't know.
I guess I can just see a point where there are fewer meaningful asymmetries to leverage. I think Charly Munger or Tweedy Browne (or etc.) said at one point that you used to have pour through pages of out of date trade journals to get a sense of companies' profitabilities and obligations, but now that can be sifted through readily by computers and databases.
So, again, while I was never all-in on indexing, I'm guessing that this spells the end for large chunks of the biz, with only a few super brains-in-beakers types of firms like Shaw or Guggenheim or etc. I don't see how First Eagle or Harris Associates or Wellington or FPA or Osterweis or etc. last another five years.

The theory is that if AI figures out that NFLX is a great company, it will generate buys for many people.
Since the stock market movements are random, AI will not guess them properly.
As someone who worked in IT over 35 years. We used to say garbage in, garbage out. That means you got to feed it the right data.
What is the right data? That is what everybody looks for. Companies with the best analysts are still looking for it.
Final found it and why it's mostly unknown. (https://blog.grainstonelee.com/insight/who-is-final-israel)

I must confess my first reaction when that UNH insurance CEO was killed last week was recalling the trauma that company had inflicted on me 20 years ago and feeling some of sense of justice.
In hind sight, I should have bought that company stock 20 years ago (instead of being resentful of their actions) because anyone that has figured out to operate like them was going to make a lot of money and some of those crumbs are going to accrue to the shareholders.
Over the next few years, we should talk about all the companies that screw consumers and the public with impunity so we can figure out which companies to invest in. And there will be plenty.
As to Nvidia, I live a few minutes from that company, I know how the company operates. They all are playing the "catch me if you can" game. Meta is a gangster in that respect.

While McAfee name has lingered, late John McAfee (1945-2021; died by suicide in a Spanish prison) wasn't involved after 1994 - almost 30 years ago. Its owners since have been Network Associates, Intel/INTC, for a short while MCFE was listed on Nasdaq but was eventually delisted, and is now owned by Advent International, a private-equity firm.
John McAfee was indeed a colorful guy and he often expressed frustration on why his name was still being used in a product that he was no longer associated with. Apparently, he didn't protect the rights to use his name, and companies owning McAfee may have thought that any publicity (good, bad, weird) was good publicity - they could tell people in private that the product McAfee had nothing to do with that wild and crazy guy (apologies to Steve Martin).

"Is McAfee really necessary on Mac products?"
I've been using Macs for some thirty years and have never needed McAfee or any other antivirus product. rforno is right- good ad-blocking software is all that you need.
i use the Firefox browser which incorporates ad-blocking software, the DuckDuckGo search engine which does no tracking, and also uBlock as added ad-blocking protection.

yes, people will lose jobs. that stinks. lately, i feel inured to such things. it's just motherloving private capitalism. no one seems to want to try anything different... every 2 or 4 years, people just switch flavors, from r to d and then back again. uemployment rate on oahu ----october, '24---- is 2.8 percent.
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/HIHONO7URN

@yogibearbull Good for you; and we're so very pleased that you arrived HERE.
TM for me, I do believe; has made a difference. Although, I can't compare to another me, as I've meditated for 50 years. And no, for those who do not meditate; I've not had some grand cosmic experience.........but a few small interesting experiences that would not have happened otherwise. Of this, I am certain. The affects on the human body are more readily measured today. This physical benefit is over and above what one may expect from a 'cosmic journey' on the side of a mental experience .

If you are able to, please elaborate the two sentences I bolded. Thanks

@yogibearbull Good for you; and we're so very pleased that you arrived HERE.
TM for me, I do believe; has made a difference. Although, I can't compare to another me, as I've meditated for 50 years. And no, for those who do not meditate; I've not had some grand cosmic experience.........but a few small interesting experiences that would not have happened otherwise. Of this, I am certain. The affects on the human body are more readily measured today. This physical benefit is over and above what one may expect from a 'cosmic journey' on the side of a mental experience .

English could theoretically adopt the equivalent of « one/one’s » as found in Romance languages. However, what people actually say has much greater influence on how a language is used and is changed; changes decreed or even suggested by some authority are rarely adopted. A least one prominent linguist has come down on the side of they/them in The NY Times. They/them grates on my ears as much as any other grammatical error or an NPR reporter who says « basically, » or « essentially » every other sentence.
The French « on » can be used to refer to a him, a her, or an unnamed person. In English the possessive his/hers changes according to the possessor, whereas « son/sa/ses » in French changes according to the gender of the noun, the thing possessed. The French « on » is flexible enough that it can be used to refer to anyone, even I, you, he, she, we, and they. British English presents a partial solution in its much more frequent use of one/one’s in everyday speech. As is the case in French, the Brits have found a way to employ « one » to refer to more than just the third person singular, but I suspect Americans would find such speech too rarified or posh to adopt it. I can’t imagine the average American saying, « One was a bit stressed by news of the outbreak of war, » where the speaker is being self-referential. The French Academy, the arbiter of all things grammar in France, made an effort some years ago to remove « sexism » from the language through suggested usage reforms; AFAIK, the efforts met with ridicule.

@catch22, I did not find the upper Michigan accent quite so pronounced as accents I met in my college years in Minnesota. I'll never forget friendly teasing from stereotypical Minnesotans commenting on my hick Missour(ah) accent.

I have used they for years, even if it's now wrong in newer ways than it used to be. :)
I have also used y'all through the years, and if I was dealing with a single human with multiple permutations to consider, there is always all y'all.

Thanks for the info @msf . I lowered my tax takeout on RMD's to cut refunds from state & fed, so will do no conversions this year. In prior years amount of refunds has been very
evenly returned.

Yikes. UVXY's been really Ultra the last 4 years: -88%, -45%, -88%, -54% ytd.

If your total withholding and estimates are at least 100% (or 110%) of last year's taxes, including January's estimates, then you're set. Otherwise you need to pay in at least 90% of what you'll owe this year in order to avoid penalties.
(The higher percentage is if you had higher income last year.)
Normally the IRS wants you to pay that 90% in even amounts. But if you have a lot of income in the 4th quarter because of a conversion (or any other reason), you're allowed to make a larger estimate in January without getting dinged for uneven tax payments.
To do that you can file a Form 2210 Schedule AI (annualized income)
https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/f2210.pdf
I did that in a few years. It's not extremely hard but it is very tedious.
Again - if you're shooting for 100% (or 110%) of last year's taxes, it doesn't matter what you make this year. If you're shooting for 90% of current taxes, then you need to make sure with a Jan 15th estimate that you hit that 90% figure of your ultimate taxes including the conversion amount.

I've used M* premium many moons back. Going by that memory, it had less than 25% of what MFOP provides.
I've yet to see any screener come anywhere close to MFOP at this price point in the 20+ years that I've been using screeners.

@dtconroe : For someone that uses CD's as much as you do, I would have thought that your ladder would have reached out a few more years.
Different strokes for different folks, Derf

Hi Derf, no I have not made a long term commitment to CDs as a long term investment option. I have used them in the past, and more recently, when they satisfied some investment objectives. When the rates change direction and start dropping below a base rate, then I prefer to re-evaluate other investing options. A short term ladder meets my needs for liquidity and flexible investing options. At 76, almost 77, I don't choose to go out very far on a CD ladder. Since retiring about 10 years ago, I have been moving much more toward a 4 to 6% TR goal, that allows me to preserve capital, by producing TR, which allows me to replenish principal, after RMD distributions each year. For several years I used a short term momentum based investing option, focusing on low risk bond oefs--I may choose to return to that investing approach as CDs mature, and if CD returns fall below 4% rates......"Different Strokes for Different Folks'

Selling PRPFX. Good long term hold, but the pace of the last year (+28%) cannot be sustained IMHO. Not a prediction of imminent doom. Just a “step-back-and-look” at its historical patterns. Two big contributors recently have been precious metals, which tend to run in cycles, and NVDA …
Owned this one over 20 years. Tough decision.
Generally I think valuations in risk assets - especially equities - are very rich. There will be better days ahead to dive into them I believe. Will bump up cash a bit and spread remainder among several existing holdings.

Assume that the market will go up during the year (that happens more years than not). Then if one doesn't need the cash flow from RMDs, one wants to take RMDs late when it's a smaller percentage of an IRA. Conversely, one wants to make Roth conversions early when a given conversion is a bigger percentage of an IRA. These are in conflict because one must take RMDs before doing any conversions.
For those with small (or no) RMDs and making large Roth conversions, doing everything early in the year can make sense. If one makes QCDs as part of the RMD (i.e. earlier than conversions), then the QCDs count toward the RMD quota.
The bottom line is that for some, QCDs, RMDs, and conversions are better done as beginning of year moves than as end of year moves.
"Consider whether it’s advantageous to convert some traditional retirement account funds into a Roth retirement account."
A conversion can make sense even if you expect to be in the same or lower tax bracket in the future. If one has "space" in the 12% tax bracket (e.g. pre-SS, pre-pension, pre-RMD, post-retirement), then one can fill up that space with conversions. This is especially advantageous if one can pay the taxes on the conversion out of a taxable account.
Given the uncertainty in investment distributions, this is a move that may best be done near the end of the year when estimated distributions are available and you know how much "space" you have available.

Not the 12 days of Christmas, but close:
Never Heard of "Tax Gain Harvesting"...seems like a good one and doesn't require a wash sale.

Consider Tax Gain Harvesting
If you’re in the 0% capital gains tax bracket, consider selling appreciated investments and repurchasing them to reset your cost basis higher at no tax cost.
Wash sale rules don’t apply to gain harvesting.
Tax gain harvesting could save you taxes in future years when your income might be higher.

Long-Term Capital Gains Tax Brackets Quick Reference (2024)
Filing Status----------0% Capital Gains-------15% Capital Gains-------20% Capital Gains
Single------------------------$0-$47,025----------$47,026-$518,900-----------Over $518,900
Married Filing Jointly-------$0-$94,050----------$94,051-$583,750---------Over $583,750
Head of Household--------$0-$63,000----------$63,001-$551,350----------Over $551,350
make-these-12-must-do-money-moves-before-the-end-of-the-year

Hi, Derf.
No. Maybe a fourth in 13 years? The dude who set up multiple accounts so that he could post smack and be cheered by "others on the board" kind of stands out. But, as you might imagine, it takes a fair amount of provocation to stir me from my administrative lethargy!
Off to listen to senior capstones!