|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Can Wall Street figure out the cause of a space shuttle crash faster than NASA's experts?
On 10 Aug 2003 05:35:28 GMT, in a place far, far away, Jim Davis
made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such a way as to indicate that: Interesting Slate article at: http://slate.msn.com/id/2086811/ Very interesting, in light of the asinine decision to shut down the DARPA initiative of a futures trading market on such events, due to bloviations on the floor of the Senate of people who are utterly clueless, but are ostensibly "leaders" of our nation... -- simberg.interglobal.org * 310 372-7963 (CA) 307 739-1296 (Jackson Hole) interglobal space lines * 307 733-1715 (Fax) http://www.interglobal.org "Extraordinary launch vehicles require extraordinary markets..." Swap the first . and @ and throw out the ".trash" to email me. Here's my email address for autospammers: |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Can Wall Street figure out the cause of a space shuttle crash fasterthan NASA's experts?
Rand Simberg wrote: On 10 Aug 2003 05:35:28 GMT, in a place far, far away, Jim Davis made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such a way as to indicate that: Interesting Slate article at: http://slate.msn.com/id/2086811/ Very interesting, in light of the asinine decision to shut down the DARPA initiative of a futures trading market on such events, due to bloviations on the floor of the Senate of people who are utterly clueless, but are ostensibly "leaders" of our nation... Sorry, but that international terrorist futures trading market should have been seen as idiotic from the start. The Senators who objected were quite wise to kill it. It has international diplomatic problems that should be apparent to almost everyone, except possibly Poindexter. Mike Walsh |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Can Wall Street figure out the cause of a space shuttle crash faster than NASA's experts?
On Mon, 11 Aug 2003 01:48:41 GMT, in a place far, far away, Michael
Walsh made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such a way as to indicate that: Very interesting, in light of the asinine decision to shut down the DARPA initiative of a futures trading market on such events, due to bloviations on the floor of the Senate of people who are utterly clueless, but are ostensibly "leaders" of our nation... Sorry, but that international terrorist futures trading market should have been seen as idiotic from the start. I strongly disagree. The Senators who objected were quite wise to kill it. In my experience "wise Senators" is an oxymoron. It has international diplomatic problems that should be apparent to almost everyone, except possibly Poindexter. They're not apparent to me, and even if they were, it's not obvious that negatives overcome the positive value of having a better handle on the probability of future events. I've no interest in defending Poindexter, who should never have been hired in the first place, but the comments coming from the floor of the Senate were what were idiotic. There is no more moral hazard in this than in the stock market. All it does is eliminate the proxy, thereby making the prediction much more transparent. -- simberg.interglobal.org * 310 372-7963 (CA) 307 739-1296 (Jackson Hole) interglobal space lines * 307 733-1715 (Fax) http://www.interglobal.org "Extraordinary launch vehicles require extraordinary markets..." Swap the first . and @ and throw out the ".trash" to email me. Here's my email address for autospammers: |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Can Wall Street figure out the cause of a space shuttle crash fasterthan NASA's experts?
Michael Walsh wrote:
Rand Simberg wrote: Jim Davis glowed: Interesting Slate article at: http://slate.msn.com/id/2086811/ Very interesting, in light of the asinine decision to shut down the DARPA initiative of a futures trading market on such events, due to bloviations on the floor of the Senate of people who are utterly clueless, but are ostensibly "leaders" of our nation... Sorry, but that international terrorist futures trading market should have been seen as idiotic from the start. The Senators who objected were quite wise to kill it. It has international diplomatic problems that should be apparent to almost everyone, except possibly Poindexter. Despite which, the method may in fact be the most consistently accurate predictor. It is horribly un-PC. And several other things. Letting people bet on events they could concievably influence is a major problem. Concept needs a thorough review, at least. But... there are a lot of horrifically un-PC things which people have come to live with because they are effective, including things like the nuclear deterrent force. Are you *sure* you want to rule out a terrorist/disruptive event futures market if it turns out to be the best predictor for such events happening? I am not... -george william herbert |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Can Wall Street figure out the cause of a space shuttle crash faster than NASA's experts?
On 11 Aug 2003 00:07:36 -0700, in a place far, far away,
(George William Herbert) made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such a way as to indicate that: It is horribly un-PC. And several other things. Letting people bet on events they could concievably influence is a major problem. Unlike, say, life insurance, which also used to be horribly un-PC... -- simberg.interglobal.org * 310 372-7963 (CA) 307 739-1296 (Jackson Hole) interglobal space lines * 307 733-1715 (Fax) http://www.interglobal.org "Extraordinary launch vehicles require extraordinary markets..." Swap the first . and @ and throw out the ".trash" to email me. Here's my email address for autospammers: |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Can Wall Street figure out the cause of a space shuttle crash fasterthan NASA's experts?
George William Herbert wrote: Michael Walsh wrote: Rand Simberg wrote: Jim Davis glowed: Interesting Slate article at: http://slate.msn.com/id/2086811/ Very interesting, in light of the asinine decision to shut down the DARPA initiative of a futures trading market on such events, due to bloviations on the floor of the Senate of people who are utterly clueless, but are ostensibly "leaders" of our nation... Sorry, but that international terrorist futures trading market should have been seen as idiotic from the start. The Senators who objected were quite wise to kill it. It has international diplomatic problems that should be apparent to almost everyone, except possibly Poindexter. Despite which, the method may in fact be the most consistently accurate predictor. It is horribly un-PC. And several other things. Letting people bet on events they could concievably influence is a major problem. Concept needs a thorough review, at least. But... there are a lot of horrifically un-PC things which people have come to live with because they are effective, including things like the nuclear deterrent force. Are you *sure* you want to rule out a terrorist/disruptive event futures market if it turns out to be the best predictor for such events happening? I am not... -george william herbert Well, first I rather doubt that a terrorist/disruptive event futures market is likely to be the best predictor for such events happening. I don't deny it could provide some interesting insights, but I think the possible fall-out is too bad. Not only is there the diplomatic what you call non-PC, but what if the prediction is correct? Fine, if it enables prevention of the incident, but it might lead to backlash if things go bad. Mike Walsh |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Can Wall Street figure out the cause of a space shuttle crashfaster than NASA's experts?
Rand Simberg wrote: On 11 Aug 2003 00:07:36 -0700, in a place far, far away, (George William Herbert) made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such a way as to indicate that: It is horribly un-PC. And several other things. Letting people bet on events they could concievably influence is a major problem. Unlike, say, life insurance, which also used to be horribly un-PC... Life insurance un-PC? I like the idea of a major organization having a selfish interest in keeping me alive. Of course, that isn't to say that it might not work out the same with family members. Mike Walsh |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Can Wall Street figure out the cause of a space shuttle crash faster than NASA's experts?
On Tue, 12 Aug 2003 01:35:35 GMT, in a place far, far away, Michael
Walsh made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such a way as to indicate that: I wonder what the reaction would have been if the French set up a market where people could bargain about the likelihood of an assassination of George Bush? If we non-governmental Americans did this Homeland Security would be right down on us. One of the many bits of evidence that the Department of "Homeland Security" is brain dead. Just like when the Secret Service investigated a Michael Ramirez cartoon as being a "threat to the president." http://washingtontimes.com/commentar...3948-5351r.htm -- simberg.interglobal.org * 310 372-7963 (CA) 307 739-1296 (Jackson Hole) interglobal space lines * 307 733-1715 (Fax) http://www.interglobal.org "Extraordinary launch vehicles require extraordinary markets..." Swap the first . and @ and throw out the ".trash" to email me. Here's my email address for autospammers: |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Can Wall Street figure out the cause of a space shuttle crash faster than NASA's experts?
On Tue, 12 Aug 2003 01:35:35 GMT, in a place far, far away, Michael
Walsh made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such a way as to indicate that: I wonder what the reaction would have been if the French set up a market where people could bargain about the likelihood of an assassination of George Bush? It depends. If that were the sole purpose of the market, I suspect that it would be (appropriately) outrage. If, on the other hand, it included the odds on the assassination of Chirac, and other world leaders, and a large number of other unfortunate events (as was the proposal here), I'm not sure what the beef would be. -- simberg.interglobal.org * 310 372-7963 (CA) 307 739-1296 (Jackson Hole) interglobal space lines * 307 733-1715 (Fax) http://www.interglobal.org "Extraordinary launch vehicles require extraordinary markets..." Swap the first . and @ and throw out the ".trash" to email me. Here's my email address for autospammers: |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Can Wall Street figure out the cause of a space shuttle crash fasterthan NASA's experts?
Michael Walsh wrote:
George William Herbert wrote: [terrorist event futures trading market] Despite which, the method may in fact be the most consistently accurate predictor. It is horribly un-PC. And several other things. Letting people bet on events they could concievably influence is a major problem. Concept needs a thorough review, at least. But... there are a lot of horrifically un-PC things which people have come to live with because they are effective, including things like the nuclear deterrent force. Are you *sure* you want to rule out a terrorist/disruptive event futures market if it turns out to be the best predictor for such events happening? I am not... Well, first I rather doubt that a terrorist/disruptive event futures market is likely to be the best predictor for such events happening. I don't deny it could provide some interesting insights, but I think the possible fall-out is too bad. Not only is there the diplomatic what you call non-PC, but what if the prediction is correct? Fine, if it enables prevention of the incident, but it might lead to backlash if things go bad. The single best value is that there is clear evidence that a large group of people allowed to 'vote' in the manner of such a trading market on what they think likely odds are of events are often significantly more accurate at predictions than the report structure that comes out of the same set of people in any heirarchical intelligence analysis group. Economics seems to be a much better filtering method than bureacracy for finding reasonable consensus spreads and odds on longshot events. As such, it probably provides a *much* better predictor for the return value in investments in foreign policy, counterterrorism, and security measures. And as fun as it is right now to be throwing enough money to go to Mars several times over at NASA rates at our national security, that will end sometime, and I want to see the spending there made in the most optimal manner possible that still reduces the odds of Al Qaeda hijacking the jet I'm on or flying a plane into the building I am in or whatever to down in the noise. If the risks of possible terrorist activity include attacks on the US president, other western allies executives, etc. ... don't you want those risks being considered and analyzed in the process? Having something happen as predicted is *good*, in a sick way. It validates the predictive value of the idea / futures exchange. Even stopping something that was predicted is a validation, so spending some attention on stuff that's coming up in the exchange is a good idea. All of that said, it still is a major deal ethical problem of global porportions, and needs a *serious* thinksee, and is still un-PC as hell, but if the most serious criticisms are simply objectively moral and complaining that it might work, I say we should get back to trying it. It might not end up working, but it's at the very least seriously worth a look. -george william herbert |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
National Space Policy: NSDD-42 (issued on July 4th, 1982) | Stuf4 | Space Shuttle | 150 | July 28th 04 07:30 AM |
Unofficial Space Shuttle Launch Guide | Steven S. Pietrobon | Space Shuttle | 0 | April 2nd 04 12:01 AM |
Unofficial Space Shuttle Launch Guide | Steven S. Pietrobon | Space Shuttle | 0 | February 2nd 04 03:33 AM |
International Space Station Science - One of NASA's rising stars | Jacques van Oene | Space Station | 0 | December 27th 03 01:32 PM |
Unofficial Space Shuttle Launch Guide | Steven S. Pietrobon | Space Shuttle | 0 | September 12th 03 01:37 AM |