« Blinded by ideology? | Main | Against debate »

November 27, 2018



Wasn't this situation precisely what the traditional jobber-broker structure of the Stock Exchange designed to deal with? The game theory of the market was such that an outsider would just get scammed. The job of the broker was to understand the game theory underlying the market and play it in the interests of his client.


It's a shame your otherwise interesting article is one paragraph too long.

When you make such an egregious mistake as to state;

"Men have traditionally had little need to think about gender, or the posh about class, or white people about race."

you lose whatever credibility you had built up to that point. Humans constantly think about gender, the wealthy constantly think about their position atop the pile and those 'beneath' them, and all people are constantly aware of racial differences.

Nick Drew

The entire enterprise of "forecasting prices" is based on the fallacy you describe.

Unsurprsingly, the track record of all forecasting is absolutely risible

And yet it is an entire industry; people pay good money for the output; and (many of) the producers are highly educated people who claim to "believe" in what they are doing, Nash Equilibrium and all

The cognitive dissonance and doublethink involved when they are invited to look back at their previous forecasts is so great, in polite circles it's considered inappropriate ever to do so. (All you get is: errrr, we've recalibrated the model since then)


Well, not a bad summary S&M, though I do think that when discussing 'strategy' you might at least mention the Keynesian 'beauty contest selection' question.

Otherwise, surely if men try to appreciate women, or the rich appreciate the poor, or whites appreciate 'coloureds', then they are just committing 'cultural (mis)appropriation' ?

Mat Weldon

Are you intentionally channeling Robert Aumann's 1987 paper "Correlated Equilibrium as an Expression of Bayesian Rationality" (Sorry can't figure out how to link on my phone) or by accident?

It not only discusses exactly the distinction between Bayesian and game-theoretic decision making, but it also begins with the Burn quite you ended with!

Mat Weldon

*Burns quote*!

The comments to this entry are closed.

blogs I like

Blog powered by Typepad