Massassi Forums Logo

This is the static archive of the Massassi Forums. The forums are closed indefinitely. Thanks for all the memories!

You can also download Super Old Archived Message Boards from when Massassi first started.

"View" counts are as of the day the forums were archived, and will no longer increase.

ForumsDiscussion Forum → Inauguration Day, Inauguration Hooooooraaay!
123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960616263646566676869707172737475767778798081828384858687888990919293949596979899100101102103104105106107108109110111112113114115116117118119120121122123124125126127128129130131132133134135136137138139140141142143144145146147148149150151152153154155156157158159160161162163164165166167168169170171172173174175176177178179180181182183184185186187188189190191192193194195196197198199200201202203204205206207208209210211212213214215216217218219220221222223224225226227228229230231232233234235236237238239240241242243244245246247248249250251252253254255256257258259260261262263264265266267268269270271272273274275276277278279280281282283284285286287288289290291292293294295296297298299300301302303304305306307308309310311312313314315316317318319320321322323324325326327328329330331332333334335336337338339340341342343344345346347348349350351352353354355356357358359360361362363364365366367368369370371372373374375376377378379380381382383384385386387388389390391392393394395396397398399400401
Inauguration Day, Inauguration Hooooooraaay!
2017-04-21, 2:28 PM #1441
Originally posted by Reverend Jones:
Only if he buys their sweat from his stock broker.

On a serious note, you mentioned something about capitalists cornering the market from unfair advantage. What is your opinion of Vanguard, which now has 80% of the mutual fund market? Is this not simply an example of markets actually working, where the company with the most efficient operation (only 40 employees managing trillions of dollars) offering the best prices to its customers?


Why aren't other companies doing the same thing to compete against them, then?
2017-04-21, 2:34 PM #1442
Fair point.

For what it's worth, I read that competing mutual funds traditionally took a more expensive approach to manually picking stocks according to analysts recommendations, whereas simply letting a simple formula pick an ETF turns out to be just as good. Apparently other mutual funds have begun to consider the cheaper more straightforward approach, but by now they have lost a lot of market share to Vanguard, which was able to offer much cheaper rates. That sounds a lot like an example of a market which actually turns out to be working like it should in this case.

Also in defense of Vanguard, I hear John Bogle praised in the same breath as Buffet and Graham, among folks who despise stock brokers as shady middlemen conferring very dubious benefits.
2017-04-21, 2:35 PM #1443
One of my RRSPs is 100% in Vanguard index funds. It's not because I sought out Vanguard funds, it's because the group RRSP vendor didn't offer non-Vanguard index funds. Ain't that a tad fishy?
2017-04-21, 2:41 PM #1444
Yes, that is strange.
2017-04-21, 3:21 PM #1445
Originally posted by Wookie06:
Well, look at his suggestions to "distribute" or earnings.


Quote:
And we can more fairly distribute our earnings on land, oil, and innovation through a system of, say, employee shares, or a universal basic income.


I don't see that as a bias?

Originally posted by Wookie06:
He pines for the days that Ivy Leaguers supposedly chose unproductive "careers in science, public service or education". Now "science" in quotes because it's ridiculously vague aside, going straight into public service or teaching I've generally considered to be terrible. Certainly it's a quaint notion but I've always thought it makes more sense for someone to gain productive real world experience and bring that to teaching and public service. Probably not always practical and certainly not always necessary but generally superior.


What's unproductive about teaching, or science? If anything I read a ****load of bias in what you're saying right here, because you're basically saying any career that depends on government funding is "unproductive".

Originally posted by Wookie06:
And these few sentences are problematic and can generate a lengthy discussion alone:


Quote:
Yet it doesn’t have to be this way. Tollgates can be torn down, financial products can be banned, tax havens dismantled, lobbies tamed, and patents rejected. Higher taxes on the ultra-rich can make rentierism less attractive, precisely because society’s biggest freeloaders are at the very top of the pyramid.


How are they problematic? What exactly is wrong about saying the structure of society is ultimately economically regressive?
2017-04-21, 3:28 PM #1446
Originally posted by Jon`C:
Professional economists are highly sought in finance and business. They are skilled data scientists and statisticians in their own right, with special expertise on developing predictive or explanatory models of human behavior. Even Valve Software, a video game company, is snapping up economists.


Damn, no jobs for mathematicians at Valve.

Originally posted by Jon`C:
If you are required to have a 0% down payment, then the median price will be infinite. (And you probably live in Canada or Australia.)


#triggered
2017-04-21, 3:33 PM #1447
Originally posted by Reverend Jones:
To be fair, you were only threatened with death because you lacked the requisite protestant work ethic needed to qualify as a Real American.

America was founded as a Christian nation. Either accept our compassion and repent, or go to Cuba.


Originally posted by Reverend Jones:
Nobody is saying that liberty isn't fragile--far from it. The remarkable republic that was framed by conservatives such as Ben Franklin and Thomas Jefferson and enshrined in the holy constitution is under constant assault by socialists.

If we don't remain vigilant and perennially refresh the tree of liberty by purchasing gold coins from talk radio ads, we risk a 1984 scenario and may soon find ourselves driving cars built by Government Motors. You can read the rest in Hayek's Road to Serfdom.


The funny thing is, the entire silly mythos the religious right holds about the founding of the United States is as often as false as the "alternative facts" of the alt-right that the more moderate Republicans have distanced themselves from. Though in some ways saying "America was founded as a Christian nation" is not false, it's just that the people who use that quote don't know enough to know what exactly that means, instead believing the Constitution is somehow infused with their religious views.
2017-04-21, 3:37 PM #1448
Originally posted by Reid:
Damn, no jobs for mathematicians at Valve.


Well, when not reduced to code monkey status, they're called programmers (C.S. is applied math, programming is C.S. + domain knowledge).

The most important figures in early computer science and programming were originally mathematicians.
2017-04-21, 3:40 PM #1449
Like, IIRC, separation of church and state exists as a doctrine because none of the states would ratify the constitution if it gave any of the other state's majority Christian sects more power. So they had to promise each state that the newly founded federal government would not push any one sect. So as a doctrine it existed to appease sectarians, not out of some lofty ideal about all religions being treated fairly. Not that it's a bad reading, but the founding of America has more to do with people being pissy about which of their exact Christian beliefs will dictate policy than true secularism of any sort.
2017-04-21, 3:41 PM #1450
Originally posted by Reid:
The funny thing is, the entire silly mythos the religious right holds about the founding of the United States is as often as false as the "alternative facts" of the alt-right that the more moderate Republicans have distanced themselves from. Though in some ways saying "America was founded as a Christian nation" is not false, it's just that the people who use that quote don't know enough to know what exactly that means, instead believing the Constitution is somehow infused with their religious views.


Color me surprised that a group of people who twist the gospel for ends directly contrary to Christ's actual teachings misrepresented a part of our culture heritage for selfish convenience.
2017-04-21, 3:42 PM #1451
Originally posted by Reverend Jones:
Well, when not reduced to code monkey status, they're called programmers (C.S. is applied math, programming is C.S. + domain knowledge).

The most important figures in early computer science and programming were originally mathematicians.


I know that's true of Donald Knuth (thanks for linking that Youtube bio, btw, I watched (listened to) the entirety of it). But I was more joking that you can't study higher homotopy theory then get a job selling digital crap to neckbeards, which I think is Steam's primary market. Which is why I probably won't study category theory, despite being interested in it.
2017-04-21, 3:43 PM #1452
Originally posted by Reid:
Like, IIRC, separation of church and state exists as a doctrine because none of the states would ratify the constitution if it gave any of the other state's majority Christian sects more power. So they had to promise each state that the newly founded federal government would not push any one sect. So as a doctrine it existed to appease sectarians, not out of some lofty ideal about all religions being treated fairly. Not that it's a bad reading, but the founding of America has more to do with people being pissy about which of their exact Christian beliefs will dictate policy than true secularism of any sort.


To be fair, Puritan society was founded on the doctrine that every man should be free to practice his oppressive religion freely (after having been shown the boot when they tried the exact same **** in the Netherlands following their exodous from England).
2017-04-21, 3:50 PM #1453
Originally posted by Reid:
I know that's true of Donald Knuth (thanks for linking that Youtube bio, btw, I watched (listened to) the entirety of it). But I was more joking that you can't study higher homotopy theory then get a job selling digital crap to neckbeards, which I think is Steam's primary market. Which is why I probably won't study category theory, despite being interested in it.


You will do basic category theory anyway if you go far enough in algebra if only as a convenient generalized language to describe what is already clear from the concrete example from algebra.

As for programming, you don't need to know too much about linear logic to take advantage of Rust's memory model, or know category theory to use ML's type system, or know a ton of logic to use prolog. But you probably won't be using math to come up with new such things if math isn't on your radar when you try to invent new **** in software from scratch, although to be fair most of that stuff was already done by the late 70s.

If you want a job at valve and appreciate what they do, a simple guess says that you should probably learn how to program using linear algebra and computer graphics before expecting topology to pay off. Also, knowing probability, calculus, and combinatorics also is helpful pretty much in anything anywhere in life no matter what.
2017-04-21, 3:56 PM #1454
Who `ya calling a neckbeard?

2017-04-21, 8:55 PM #1455
Originally posted by Reid:
I know that's true of Donald Knuth (thanks for linking that Youtube bio, btw, I watched (listened to) the entirety of it).


One thing I noticed from those recordings is that Knuth only makes eye contact about 10% of the time. I guess he's pretty well re-purposed his visual and spatial faculties for abstract stuff and doesn't like those neural circuits to be thrown off by facial cues.

Joke: How do you find the extroverted mathematician from the group?

S/he will be looking at the other person's shoes.
2017-04-22, 12:30 AM #1456
Quote:
It's different now, we need to adjust to new realities like cramped communal apartments and being forced to work gray or black market "gigs" in the "sharing economy" in order to afford decent things. But this is all good, it just means our region is very wealthy and successful. The alternatives, like rent control or government meddling in affordable housing, would be like communism and communism led to people in shared apartments forced into side work and black market trade to get by.


.
2017-04-22, 12:56 AM #1457
Originally posted by Jon`C:
.


This is fun because when i was a kid I remember being confused because people told me that if we became a communist country that they would make people who weren't my family live in my house, and I couldn't figure out why all of the young adults I knew had roommates. And now the sharing economy has taken that to a whole new level, somehow as a bulwark against communism.
Epstein didn't kill himself.
2017-04-22, 5:53 AM #1458
Is it a symptom of late-stage capitalism when people are starting companies solely/almost singularly-purposed for the hope of being acquired by another, much much larger company? Genuine question
SnailIracing:n(500tpostshpereline)pants
-----------------------------@%
2017-04-22, 12:00 PM #1459
I also can't help but wonder if it gets to the point where they give them offers they "can't refuse", and proceed to destroy them should they refuse to sell out. Say, by litigating patent infringement, etc. I am sure something like this has happened already.
2017-04-22, 12:48 PM #1460
Originally posted by ECHOMAN:
Is it a symptom of late-stage capitalism when people are starting companies solely/almost singularly-purposed for the hope of being acquired by another, much much larger company? Genuine question


Shockingly, no. It's the same thing as manufacturing capital (tools/machines) for the primary and secondary sectors.

The "capital" of the quaternary sector is a productive team of engineers, or a ready-made audience. The fact that we're talking about teams and intellectual property changes the terminology and the legal structure of the arrangement; the venture capitalists are the manufacturers, and the startup founders are the line managers - but that linguistic shift doesn't change what's really happening.

The real symptom of late-stage capitalism is the fact that quaternary capital manufacturing is the only type of business being started.
2017-04-22, 1:37 PM #1461
Jon, where did you learn everything you know about economics?
2017-04-22, 1:46 PM #1462
Yes, Jon, where DID you learn everything you know about economics? Huh?
"I would rather claim to be an uneducated man than be mal-educated and claim to be otherwise." - Wookie 03:16

2017-04-22, 2:53 PM #1463
Are you asking him how he obviously learned about it from people and books, or that he tell you which ones?
2017-04-22, 3:13 PM #1464
I used to be a pro-globalism pro-capitalist who didn't really know or care much about economics beyond maintaining that grade school orthodoxy. Then I took university Econ courses from a neoliberal faculty. Being exposed to neoliberal thought, and analyzing their arguments, drastically changed my opinion about the subject. Far from being indoctrinated into their cult of thought, I realized that their ideas imply a lot of very bad things but nobody wanted to talk about them.

Since then, I've simply been a lot more interested and competent in the subject. It makes economic papers and publications much more accessible, especially when it comes to filtering out the bull**** (e.g. The Economist's conclusions about pretty much anything)
2017-04-22, 3:15 PM #1465
Quote:
I used to be a pro-globalism pro-capitalist who didn't really know or care much about economics beyond maintaining that grade school orthodoxy. Then I took university Econ courses from a neoliberal faculty. Being exposed to neoliberal thought, and analyzing their arguments, drastically changed my opinion about the subject. Far from being indoctrinated into their cult of thought, I realized that their ideas imply a lot of very bad things but nobody wanted to talk about them.


This is pretty funny, because I was about to make another post in which I would sarcastically pretend that actually, Jon could only have been brainwashed by 'liberals' in public school.
2017-04-22, 3:22 PM #1466
Originally posted by Reverend Jones:
Are you asking him how he obviously learned about it from people and books, or that he tell you which ones?


I was just making fun of his question a bit. I'm actually highly envious of Jon's speed reading skills.
"I would rather claim to be an uneducated man than be mal-educated and claim to be otherwise." - Wookie 03:16

2017-04-22, 3:30 PM #1467
Originally posted by Jon`C:
I used to be a pro-globalism pro-capitalist who didn't really know or care much about economics beyond maintaining that grade school orthodoxy. Then I took university Econ courses from a neoliberal faculty. Being exposed to neoliberal thought, and analyzing their arguments, drastically changed my opinion about the subject. Far from being indoctrinated into their cult of thought, I realized that their ideas imply a lot of very bad things but nobody wanted to talk about them.

Since then, I've simply been a lot more interested and competent in the subject. It makes economic papers and publications much more accessible, especially when it comes to filtering out the bull**** (e.g. The Economist's conclusions about pretty much anything)

What can you recommend I read? I've seen only your typical 101 supply curve stuff.
2017-04-22, 3:43 PM #1468
I believe this is wear he recommends some gigantic or dense book. This has all happened here before and this will all happen here again.
"I would rather claim to be an uneducated man than be mal-educated and claim to be otherwise." - Wookie 03:16

2017-04-22, 3:50 PM #1469
That's alright, I can handle that.
2017-04-22, 4:02 PM #1470
The weird part is when you get a political movement which bashes 'liberal brainwashing' in public schools, and which also happens to rally around conserving a neoliberal system that the very school system they bash is propagating.

But I guess made up cultural issues are more tantalizing than (not cartoon) economics.
2017-04-22, 4:05 PM #1471
Whether you plan to handle it or wear the gigantic book, I recommend buying a book bag instead.
2017-04-22, 4:13 PM #1472
Originally posted by Reid:
What can you recommend I read? I've seen only your typical 101 supply curve stuff.


You need to understand and be able to reason about the 101 supply curve stuff, and the 102 policy stuff, until you can really learn about anything else.

Once you understand the language, you can research pretty much anything that interests you. It doesn't really matter. Economics is a social science concerned with how humans cooperate together, and you can read pretty much any subject from an economic perspective if you choose to do so.
2017-04-22, 6:42 PM #1473
Originally posted by Wookie06:
I believe this is wear he recommends some gigantic or dense book. This has all happened here before and this will all happen here again.


time is a flat circle
Epstein didn't kill himself.
2017-04-22, 9:42 PM #1474
Oh man, I can't handle those big books full of words. I hope there's something like a booklet conveying most of this stuff in pictures.
Looks like we're not going down after all, so nevermind.
2017-04-22, 10:18 PM #1475
Originally posted by Krokodile:
Oh man, I can't handle those big books full of words. I hope there's something like a booklet conveying most of this stuff in pictures.


Perhaps some sort of manifesto?

You could actually do worse than read The Principles of Communism by Engels. It is an easy 13 page read, much of which discusses the changing living conditions at the dawn of capitalism as told by someone who was alive to witness them.
2017-04-22, 11:16 PM #1476
Originally posted by Krokodile:
Oh man, I can't handle those big books full of words. I hope there's something like a booklet conveying most of this stuff in pictures.


Oh darn, I was going to recommend the book of mormon since the mormons tried communism for a while but then gave up and went full capitalists, with a (semi) brief period of theocracy.
Epstein didn't kill himself.
2017-04-22, 11:24 PM #1477
Originally posted by Jon`C:
Perhaps some sort of manifesto?

You could actually do worse than read The Principles of Communism by Engels. It is an easy 13 page read, much of which discusses the changing living conditions at the dawn of capitalism as told by someone who was alive to witness them.


Seriously, read it.

Once you're done, if you find yourself wondering why Marx and Engels had the same complaints about capitalism in the 1840s that we have today, but for some reason our parents and grandparents thought it was just swell, then you should read Capital in the Twenty-First Century, a billion pages of terse French which discusses in exhaustive detail exactly why capitalism didn't suck so bad after WW2 ended.

Spoiler alert: It's because WW2 temporarily destroyed capitalism. The proletariat class only started to re-emerge in the late 1970s.
2017-04-23, 12:15 AM #1478
Oh is that why the 70s was the peak of western civilization and we have been circling the drain and producing superficial gains since then?

Oh wait but technology
Epstein didn't kill himself.
2017-04-23, 12:40 AM #1479
Originally posted by Spook:
Oh is that why the 70s was the peak of western civilization and we have been circling the drain and producing superficial gains since then?

Oh wait but technology
Yeah, I bet your moon rockets have gotten way better since then
2017-04-23, 1:38 AM #1480
Originally posted by Jon`C:
Seriously, read it.

Once you're done, if you find yourself wondering why Marx and Engels had the same complaints about capitalism in the 1840s that we have today, but for some reason our parents and grandparents thought it was just swell, then you should read Capital in the Twenty-First Century, a billion pages of terse French which discusses in exhaustive detail exactly why capitalism didn't suck so bad after WW2 ended.

Spoiler alert: It's because WW2 temporarily destroyed capitalism. The proletariat class only started to re-emerge in the late 1970s.

That was surprisingly astute, never before read any of the distinction between communists and socialists, and I can't think of a better way to describe the divide between the alt-right (reactionary socialists) versus bourgeois socialists (partisan democrats i.e. wealthy clinton supporters)
123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960616263646566676869707172737475767778798081828384858687888990919293949596979899100101102103104105106107108109110111112113114115116117118119120121122123124125126127128129130131132133134135136137138139140141142143144145146147148149150151152153154155156157158159160161162163164165166167168169170171172173174175176177178179180181182183184185186187188189190191192193194195196197198199200201202203204205206207208209210211212213214215216217218219220221222223224225226227228229230231232233234235236237238239240241242243244245246247248249250251252253254255256257258259260261262263264265266267268269270271272273274275276277278279280281282283284285286287288289290291292293294295296297298299300301302303304305306307308309310311312313314315316317318319320321322323324325326327328329330331332333334335336337338339340341342343344345346347348349350351352353354355356357358359360361362363364365366367368369370371372373374375376377378379380381382383384385386387388389390391392393394395396397398399400401

↑ Up to the top!