| Author |
Message |
    
duncanrogers
Citizen
Username: Duncanrogers
Post Number: 627
Registered: 12-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 29, 2003 - 2:18 pm: |     |
One of those ever increasing moments of relief that I am not a registered republican..
Of all the idiotic ideas this one has to rank right up there.
"Under the discarded plan, traders bullish on a biological attack on Israel, say, or bearish on the chances of a North Korean missile strike would have had the opportunity to bet on the likelihood of such events on a new Internet site established by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency."
Thank God it got shot down. Where oh where is the Strawberry.. how I would love to hear him try to spin this one |
themp
Citizen
Username: Themp
Post Number: 128
Registered: 12-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 29, 2003 - 2:39 pm: | |
Duncan - don't you get it? The free market is the only means for uncovering "truth". It is the only real, uncorruptible thing in the universe. By watching a ticker in the corner of his office, John Ashcroft will know when to slide down his batpole into action. Do you want some government bureaucrat deciding how to interpret intelligence data? |
zoe
Citizen
Username: Zoe
Post Number: 288
Registered: 7-2002
| | Posted on Friday, August 1, 2003 - 2:17 pm: | |
The funniest thing of all is that this would have worked and worked very well. Aren't any of you people aware of the "Deadman Pool."
In the "Deadman Pool" buyers and sellers bid and offer money on the likelihood that someone, say Bob Hope, will be the next in the pool to die. It becomes quite accurate after players gain experience.
This morbid method has proven historical data. Watch the stock market, interest rates, currencies and oil values. See and learn how they become excellent predictors. Watch how they disseminate information rapidly and adjust swiftly to any threat. Just because an idea is morbid doesn't mean that it doesn't help predict catastrophy. It is like smoke coming from a volcano, or the "Deadman Pool." Want to play?
|
Tom Reingold
Citizen
Username: Noglider
Post Number: 313
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Friday, August 1, 2003 - 2:24 pm: | |
Thanks for the explanation, zoe. It makes sense. And betting on an attack is not as morbid as a bet that oneself will die, which is what we are doing when we buy life insurance. They call it life assurance in Britain, which is more accurate.
Tom Reingold
|
Nohero
Citizen
Username: Nohero
Post Number: 1887
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Friday, August 1, 2003 - 2:33 pm: | |
It wasn't a bad idea because it was morbid. It was a bad idea because it was stupid.
A "Dead Pool", or the Iowa Futures market (which takes guesses or "bets" on things such as political campaigns) do not purport to be tools to actually influence the outcome of the events they cover.
The program proposed and withdrawn by the Defense Department had a different purpose. Theoretically, the market would be a means to find out what the "collective wisdom" is, in order to harness more "brain power" to thwart terrorism. Depending on the choices made by market participants, the government would possibly take some action to prevent the threat which the market shows is coming.
A normal futures market does not have that great an impact, on the subject being traded in the market. In contrast, the government would have been counting on the traders in this market to show the government what to do, to prevent the attacks which are being predicted. Good "guessers" would therefore have to expect that, the better they are at guessing, the less likely they are to "win".
It's a poor analogy, but this is sort of equivalent to the "Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle": the very act of studying the phenomenon, influences what is happening, so that the facts become less certain.
But what do I know ... |
themp
Citizen
Username: Themp
Post Number: 134
Registered: 12-2001
| | Posted on Friday, August 1, 2003 - 2:42 pm: | |
It would not have worked very well because the actors with knowledge of upcoming events would have motives that run contrary to market principles. The feedback between the acts of terrorism and the "information" in the market would cancel the value of the information, and might create perverse incentives. Might also be used as a propaganda tool in all sorts of ways.
Predicting someone's death is a lock, since we will all die eventually. It doesn't involve any actors. What market deals exclusively in unwanted and illegal acts? Get you nose out of Ayn Rand. |
Dave Ross
Supporter
Username: Dave
Post Number: 4944
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Friday, August 1, 2003 - 3:00 pm: | |
A single spy infiltrating the terror futures market would have all the information required to hit soft spots in our defenses. It was beyond morbid and stupid, it was dangerous. |
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page