Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : The Epic American Credit and Bond Bubble Laboratory -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Joe Stocks who wrote (67071)	7/29/2006 11:26:27 PM
From: mishedlo	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 110194

Joe that is the angle I am perhaps interested in. But I do not know what to make of it still. Greenspans comments (if you read the whole explanation) are defensible IMO. The question is "what did he mean?" This is all leaving me frustrated. I have for 2 hours been trying to find something to write about and I can not do it. Perhaps my mind is just too cluttered. Some days I have 5 things I want to write about but only have time for 1. Mish

To: Joe Stocks who wrote (67071)	7/30/2006 4:40:51 AM
From: shades	Respond to of 110194

our free market in stocks. Joe have you read the book I, Robot - asimov made the case decades ago that computer trading was mankind's future. There have been studies about the "wisdom of crowds" - this can apply to our stock markets as well. I remember one example of how on gameshows that the crowd typically has the right answer - say "price is right." In my classes on AI though we were taught you have to study the human brain in depth versus breadth type problems. IE we can take 5000 chess masters and put them up against a DEEP BLUE chess computer and even though we have the "wisdom of crowds" and 5000 brains working against the computer - the human brains lose and the DEEP BLUE chess computer wins - why you ask? The problems faced in gameshows versus the ones faced in chess are very different depth wise versus breadth wise. Adding more brains without deeper thinking does not give an edge over the computer than can "think" very far ahead and very deeply. 5000 chessmasters who in aggregate might see 10 moves ahead won't beat the computer that can see 40 moves ahead - adding 10 billion more chessmasters and the aggregate remaining at 10 moves will not beat the sole computer - in this example the free market of 10 billion people is not as good as the computer at making the most successful move eh? If you study human memory retention - it is not very long or very good for a lot of people in a lot of situations - they get popular myth or psuedoscience ideas in thier head because thier mind can more easily map those concepts into thier thinking - but it is often WRONG. Like the old saying goes the devil is in the details - details that are hard for the human brain on average to comprehend. Take Medical Diagnoses - back in college a while back they were designing medical AI expert systems. They were running tests against a group of about 40 doctors - all well trained medical people who had extensively read many journals and had many years of experience - they also had the medical "expert system" AI program with many many rules and scenarios - send a patient in with certain lab test results and symptoms - the doctors had good "breadth" type aggregate recommendations for treatment - but if there was something special to the diagnosis that say having a certain blood pressure level versus potassium level that was uncommon - the expert system could make the better diagnosis - there may have been 40 different interacting variables that even having a large sample of doctors was not able to see all the interactions because it is a depth type problem - something our brains are not collectively so good at - it was not necessary as an evolutionary mechanism I suppose. So you have a medical problem - and you have this computer program that cen see much more deeply and many more combinations and interactions of various variables - would you rather the doctors who can't think as deeply as the computer recommend you some vioxx? Perhaps the computer knows certain drug interactions are fatal when you are taking 40 pills a day that the doctors don't - your life. I will take DEEP BLUE over the 5000 chess masters any day. Now take the BIG DIG engineering project - there were flaws from what I am reading - 4000 average engineers designing specs for that project probably would make more mistakes than one well programmed deep thinking AI system with just a few excellent engineers. It can work better with depth problems. Try to find the largest known prime using your brain - there are many scenarios where computers will beat you John Henry as it should be. Is the stock market one of those things we want to wrestle away from j5p and princess who are very irrational people that watch too much price is right. www.dailyrotten.com newsoftheweird.com - is this who should direct the future of our planet and efficiently allocate resources? You have been liviing in an engineered society for a long time to protect you from these types eh?