Earlier, 7oops7 asked if there would be another shoe to drop. Well, there have been a couple: Madoff (made off, with the money) and the Fed Fund rate drop to 0.25%.
Now, the former is pure crap; the WSJ opinion that this type of thing cannot be avoided (Editorial, 12/15/2008) is other than smart (yes, you guys are showing your biases). The WSJ said that cops cannot prevent buglary. Well, true in a sense. But, we sure in hell can reduce to a very low level the likelihood that a buglar can work his trade (security, being smart, ...).
The second shoe brings up another bit of silliness supported by the Fed and Chicago. It's the Fed's Funds Rate futures market from which many spend valuable hours trying to discern Fed movements. Hah! Talk about reading tea-leaves. And, we think that the western culture is so smart with its mathematics. This will be important due to the emphasis in this blog on the issues of quasi-empiricism. It's bad enough that we have the gab standard, now we have gaming (ah yes, derivatives) on top of that.
The blogger has to admit that some of the rantings about malfeasance due to computation and mathematics were based upon a set that did not include these two; yet, having these two as examples strengthens the set and provides a better case for discussing solutions.
As, both of these shoes deal more closely with the motivations of truth engineering than did things like those related to the golden boys (ah, count 'em: GS, BS, ..., almost interminable list).
Remarks:
08/27/2009 -- Madoff exemplifies (albeit somewhat indirectly) systemic risk.
08/24/2009 -- Last year, Ben blinked and panicked. He frantically pulled out all stops as if with no thought for tomorrow. Now, he has no use for 'mea culpa' big daddy that he is. Ben, start to unwind now. The Vienna School's view that these things are undecidable (which is a computational issue) is right on.
01/27/2009 -- Now a new day and way to consider these matters.
Modified: 08/27/2009
Tuesday, December 16, 2008
Thursday, December 11, 2008
Truth and all
There are many sides to truth which can prove to be troublesome in various situations.
Past truth is definitely different from future truth, as we might learn in some of cases. That is, much of now is a replay of before, yet how many times do we get into situations that were supposedly just a simple matter but things got complicated?
We will point to several of these, including the Boeing 787 which is now planned to fly in the second quarter of 2009 and be delivered in the first quarter of 2010. This latest round of estimates follows several which we'll itemize.
Can the plane go through its truth check, which is essentially what the flight test period stands for, in the short time that is now planned? Well, opinions differ. You know what? Those opinions don't amount to a hill of beans, usually.
Why? Well, with something real, like the plane, it has to actually work in a real setting. Now, we can evaluate whether it passed the tests in an ex post facto sense, but we cannot say that it will do so in a forward sense.
Boeing knows this as it has caveats posted about not having 20-20 foresight. Who does? The issue is whether we ought to continue to have the game where the future is predicted, then we all sit around and determine how close the prediction was?
Oh, wait!! That is what science claims for itself, does it not? But, is business and program management a matter of science? Well, that depends upon to whom you talk. Being frank, I'll say no.
What it is, and folks just look at the golden boys of the Street to see what I am talking about (did we not have to bail them out? And 'it is' means business playing like it's a science), is silly misuse of mathematics and computation.
No amount of computer modeling can stand in for nature or the real world. We'll always be getting back to that. Boeing ought to already know that risk management failed so far, in the large that is. No doubt, there are points where the plan worked. Some might say Spirit, except it's just a little Boeing, in a sense.
So, this plane is only one of several 'models' that we'll need to look at as we talk about why truth engineering is a necessary part of the future landscape, virtual and otherwise.
Remarks:
12/13/2008 -- Just when the financial matters looked to be under control.
Modified: 12/13/2008
Past truth is definitely different from future truth, as we might learn in some of cases. That is, much of now is a replay of before, yet how many times do we get into situations that were supposedly just a simple matter but things got complicated?
We will point to several of these, including the Boeing 787 which is now planned to fly in the second quarter of 2009 and be delivered in the first quarter of 2010. This latest round of estimates follows several which we'll itemize.
Can the plane go through its truth check, which is essentially what the flight test period stands for, in the short time that is now planned? Well, opinions differ. You know what? Those opinions don't amount to a hill of beans, usually.
Why? Well, with something real, like the plane, it has to actually work in a real setting. Now, we can evaluate whether it passed the tests in an ex post facto sense, but we cannot say that it will do so in a forward sense.
Boeing knows this as it has caveats posted about not having 20-20 foresight. Who does? The issue is whether we ought to continue to have the game where the future is predicted, then we all sit around and determine how close the prediction was?
Oh, wait!! That is what science claims for itself, does it not? But, is business and program management a matter of science? Well, that depends upon to whom you talk. Being frank, I'll say no.
What it is, and folks just look at the golden boys of the Street to see what I am talking about (did we not have to bail them out? And 'it is' means business playing like it's a science), is silly misuse of mathematics and computation.
No amount of computer modeling can stand in for nature or the real world. We'll always be getting back to that. Boeing ought to already know that risk management failed so far, in the large that is. No doubt, there are points where the plan worked. Some might say Spirit, except it's just a little Boeing, in a sense.
So, this plane is only one of several 'models' that we'll need to look at as we talk about why truth engineering is a necessary part of the future landscape, virtual and otherwise.
Remarks:
12/13/2008 -- Just when the financial matters looked to be under control.
Modified: 12/13/2008
Wednesday, November 26, 2008
Lean and truth
It's review time again, being Thanksgiving, which is a secular American holiday.
As noted in the banner, posts here concern 'being' (small t) and its importance; basically, trends, such as Lean, have removed being out of the modern mindset which may explain a whole lot of trouble.
But, let's start our analysis with Lean, as there will be more culprits. For those who don't know, Lean is an initiative that removes waste from a process, thereby reducing cost. It can help improve quality, too.
But, Lean deals with processes, not being. Process foci lead to protocols. As said before, protocols deal with averages. The world of being is not average, anywhere. Or, we could say that being is everywhere dense. Yet, we have been allowed to stumble along with our averages.
Until, that is, we see things like the 787 project and the current economic mess. These two have problems with similar etiologies.
The questions need to be analyzed and addressed under a Truth Engineering framework. That is our work for the coming year.
Remarks:
09/02/2009 -- Lean assumes a current framework which can be improved. That the process is still effective during the change can be checked easily. However, if it is not still effective or we do not have a stable framework, then we were, by necessity, in the undecidable state.
Modified: 09/02/2009
As noted in the banner, posts here concern 'being' (small t) and its importance; basically, trends, such as Lean, have removed being out of the modern mindset which may explain a whole lot of trouble.
But, let's start our analysis with Lean, as there will be more culprits. For those who don't know, Lean is an initiative that removes waste from a process, thereby reducing cost. It can help improve quality, too.
But, Lean deals with processes, not being. Process foci lead to protocols. As said before, protocols deal with averages. The world of being is not average, anywhere. Or, we could say that being is everywhere dense. Yet, we have been allowed to stumble along with our averages.
Until, that is, we see things like the 787 project and the current economic mess. These two have problems with similar etiologies.
The questions need to be analyzed and addressed under a Truth Engineering framework. That is our work for the coming year.
Remarks:
09/02/2009 -- Lean assumes a current framework which can be improved. That the process is still effective during the change can be checked easily. However, if it is not still effective or we do not have a stable framework, then we were, by necessity, in the undecidable state.
Modified: 09/02/2009
Thursday, November 20, 2008
Islamic Finance
As we watch things unravel due to influences, such as leveraging and gaming, and observe discussions about how to get stable, we might consider that the big 'T' issues might bear some of our attention, at some point.
In the meantime, we might learn something from Islamic Law which does deal with banking (and finance). Speculation is verboten as is usury.
Business Week (11/24/08) wondered if "Islamic Finance may be on to something." But, the focus of the article was on how Islamic banks fared in the current situation of toxic debt. Well, "excessive debt" is not allowed.
One has to wonder how the western mind came up with the notion that leveraging was creative. Clever it may be; yet, stupid is another way to characterize the propensity to gamble away one's future.
Sharia-based methods do not mean not-modern, witness the debit-card offered by Mastercard that is compliant.
By the way, search at Business Week on 'Islamic Finance' and read more, if you are interested.
The current set of oops that is due to mis-cues, poor thinking, mathematical-malfeasance, greed, etc., cannot be other than a lesson on how not to do it. We do know how.
Remarks:
11/21/15 -- Why-does-the-Islamic-banking-system-not-charge-interest-on-loans-and-advances-What-are-their-alternative-sources-of-revenue?
10/17/2011 -- If we're to challenge Harvard on its duty, then we'll need to beef this up. For one, is education only operationally important, measured in bucks? Ah, so much to discuss.
06/20/2009 -- The Economist reports on an attempt to build a "truly global Islamic bank."
02/03/2009 -- It would do well to consider how the Islamic culture can add to the capitalism/socialism debates. One start might be to read about Islamic Economics, such as this insightful look at command versus free enterprise, albeit with other influences at hand.
01/18/2009 - We even need to look at why we need finance.
12/18/2008 -- Leveraging, in and of itself, is not bad.
12/01/2008 -- AME Info asks: Are Islamic banks the financial institutions of the future? There are two attributes of importance, elsewhere covered in these posts: asset-based system, closer to the real economy. The former pertains to the leveraging issue, in part. The latter has to do with the abstraction-phile leanings of the western mind as well as the fictional flavorings.
Modified: 11/21/2015
In the meantime, we might learn something from Islamic Law which does deal with banking (and finance). Speculation is verboten as is usury.
Business Week (11/24/08) wondered if "Islamic Finance may be on to something." But, the focus of the article was on how Islamic banks fared in the current situation of toxic debt. Well, "excessive debt" is not allowed.
One has to wonder how the western mind came up with the notion that leveraging was creative. Clever it may be; yet, stupid is another way to characterize the propensity to gamble away one's future.
Sharia-based methods do not mean not-modern, witness the debit-card offered by Mastercard that is compliant.
By the way, search at Business Week on 'Islamic Finance' and read more, if you are interested.
The current set of oops that is due to mis-cues, poor thinking, mathematical-malfeasance, greed, etc., cannot be other than a lesson on how not to do it. We do know how.
Remarks:
11/21/15 -- Why-does-the-Islamic-banking-system-not-charge-interest-on-loans-and-advances-What-are-their-alternative-sources-of-revenue?
10/17/2011 -- If we're to challenge Harvard on its duty, then we'll need to beef this up. For one, is education only operationally important, measured in bucks? Ah, so much to discuss.
06/20/2009 -- The Economist reports on an attempt to build a "truly global Islamic bank."
02/03/2009 -- It would do well to consider how the Islamic culture can add to the capitalism/socialism debates. One start might be to read about Islamic Economics, such as this insightful look at command versus free enterprise, albeit with other influences at hand.
01/18/2009 - We even need to look at why we need finance.
12/18/2008 -- Leveraging, in and of itself, is not bad.
12/01/2008 -- AME Info asks: Are Islamic banks the financial institutions of the future? There are two attributes of importance, elsewhere covered in these posts: asset-based system, closer to the real economy. The former pertains to the leveraging issue, in part. The latter has to do with the abstraction-phile leanings of the western mind as well as the fictional flavorings.
Modified: 11/21/2015
Saturday, November 8, 2008
Computer and being
While talking about pseudo-science at CalTech, the late Michael Crichton mentioned that one problematic issue is thinking of computational output as data. Posts in this blog have ragged about that type of thing, to boot.
In one case, a claim might be made that erroneous outcomes in both design and planning are directly related to too much reliance on the computational framework. Where things can really go awry is during a long computational chain where results from one step are fed into another.
We'll have to look at this issue from several angles, as things may not be as clear as they may seem to certain viewpoints, including looking at the being of money.
Remarks:
06/20/2009 -- Yes, rent can go to labor (new look at capitalism), and finance can have a higher calling.
11/18/2008 -- One thing that engineering can do is test against reality. The better the effort in this regard, the more understanding of the underlying theory can improve. Unfortunately, financial engineering is handicapped from the beginning.
Yet, we can do it right.
Modified: 06/20/2009
In one case, a claim might be made that erroneous outcomes in both design and planning are directly related to too much reliance on the computational framework. Where things can really go awry is during a long computational chain where results from one step are fed into another.
We'll have to look at this issue from several angles, as things may not be as clear as they may seem to certain viewpoints, including looking at the being of money.
Remarks:
06/20/2009 -- Yes, rent can go to labor (new look at capitalism), and finance can have a higher calling.
11/18/2008 -- One thing that engineering can do is test against reality. The better the effort in this regard, the more understanding of the underlying theory can improve. Unfortunately, financial engineering is handicapped from the beginning.
Yet, we can do it right.
Modified: 06/20/2009
Thursday, November 6, 2008
Casino capitalism
Yes, sounds like the 'fictitious capital' idea of Marx. The phrase in the title was used in recent Congressional inquiries about the mess of the economy (but worse than casino, see Remarks on 01/29/2009). And, who was there? Fat cats and CEOS!!
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.
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
Monday, November 3, 2008
Greek to many
As mentioned before with the topics of fiction and leveraging, there needs to be some time occasionally where things lay quiet during a catch-up activity, such as looking more deeply into the recent advances (if one could call them that) of finance. Given that the gaming behind the market is mathematically colored and given that we need to get technical, some time will be spent immersed in details of the CBOE and related efforts, such as Options Monster.
Today, volatility was the theme that has a few interesting twists in its influence on the pricing of options. So, to look at that, we need to start with "the Greeks" and the related etiology.
All one has to do is consider the strategies related to option trading (pages and pages of tables) to see the relation to gaming.
Our future, in general, requires better than that albeit that many do support themselves quite well through the auspices of CBOE, et al.
Remarks:
11/21/2010 -- Three years ago, it was said: Computational foci raise miraculous need. Still applies.
Today, volatility was the theme that has a few interesting twists in its influence on the pricing of options. So, to look at that, we need to start with "the Greeks" and the related etiology.
All one has to do is consider the strategies related to option trading (pages and pages of tables) to see the relation to gaming.
Our future, in general, requires better than that albeit that many do support themselves quite well through the auspices of CBOE, et al.
Remarks:
11/21/2010 -- Three years ago, it was said: Computational foci raise miraculous need. Still applies.
08/18/2009 -- As promised, FEDaerated is here.
02/18/2009 -- We can look at why securities become toxic, almost by necessity.
12/18/2008 -- Leveraging, in and of itself, is not bad.
Modified: 11/21/2010
02/18/2009 -- We can look at why securities become toxic, almost by necessity.
12/18/2008 -- Leveraging, in and of itself, is not bad.
Modified: 11/21/2010
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)