Why can't we hear discussions about the hard stuff in regard to modeling, decisions, etc.?
Naturally, power has its ways and means. But, consider that the future may very well require in-depth and continual assessments on more than just what the suits like to see. Yes, we have to get technical.
It's like this: Hey suits (you know who you are) , your role has always been mostly ceremonial. What? Yes, the game (not that gaming is necessary) has descended to rewarding those whose greed can best be compared to that of an infant's for milk. Is that flattering or what?
So, this'll be a regular topic, as Truth Engineering is directly related to those technical issues of truth that are gamed by power, that are confounded by computer, and that are not easy in any regard since our best efforts are limited quasi-empirically.
Yes, that money has being has somehow been lost in the shuffle.
Remarks:
03/22/2011 -- It's spring, and the garble uses gambling metaphors.
01/27/2010 -- It's really ca-pital-sino.
10/06/2009 -- Discussion has gone over to FED-aerated.
07/17/2009 -- China's bucket is 2+ trillion. Ours, over here - the analogous thingee - is a growing deficit. You have to hand it to the Marxists who beat us at our own game of casino capitalism.
06/20/2009 -- Yes, rent can go to labor (new look at capitalism), and finance can have a higher calling.
01/30/2009 -- Corrected, in part (see 1/29/2009). Why? Well, CBOE-driven and other changes to market technology are ontologically game-centric which the 'casino' delimits well as a concept. That hedging leads to speculation and ponzi comes out of dynamics (see Minsky) that we need to understand better in order to control. And, that cannot be done without reigning in the misuse of mathematics (and malfeasance allowed due to the confounding). We'll have to look at this issue further.
01/29/2009 -- The Economist in its review of the current mess and the 'future of finance' makes an interesting point. We use 'casino' to deride the improper capitalistic bent. Yet, it's worse. "The numbers on a roulette wheel never change, but markets offer no guarantee that yesterday’s odds will be the same tomorrow." So, we stand corrected.
01/18/2009 - We even need to look at why we need finance.
12/01/2008 -- We need to learn what we might be taught about money by Islamic Finance.
Modified: 03/22/2011
10/06/2009 -- Discussion has gone over to FED-aerated.
07/17/2009 -- China's bucket is 2+ trillion. Ours, over here - the analogous thingee - is a growing deficit. You have to hand it to the Marxists who beat us at our own game of casino capitalism.
06/20/2009 -- Yes, rent can go to labor (new look at capitalism), and finance can have a higher calling.
01/30/2009 -- Corrected, in part (see 1/29/2009). Why? Well, CBOE-driven and other changes to market technology are ontologically game-centric which the 'casino' delimits well as a concept. That hedging leads to speculation and ponzi comes out of dynamics (see Minsky) that we need to understand better in order to control. And, that cannot be done without reigning in the misuse of mathematics (and malfeasance allowed due to the confounding). We'll have to look at this issue further.
01/29/2009 -- The Economist in its review of the current mess and the 'future of finance' makes an interesting point. We use 'casino' to deride the improper capitalistic bent. Yet, it's worse. "The numbers on a roulette wheel never change, but markets offer no guarantee that yesterday’s odds will be the same tomorrow." So, we stand corrected.
01/18/2009 - We even need to look at why we need finance.
12/01/2008 -- We need to learn what we might be taught about money by Islamic Finance.
Modified: 03/22/2011
No comments:
Post a Comment