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.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: J_F_Shepard who wrote (587512)	9/25/2010 10:27:26 PM
From: d[-_-]b	5 Recommendations Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1572207

A Nobel Prize is awarded every year for work that is usually done many years earlier.. Odumbo comes to mind as to how useless that group has become. Because of the huge numbers of variables, economic models are difficult to produce. Having written many simulations in SLAMII - many variables are ignored or simply unaccounted for because it's impossible to predict/estimate there contribution - that's why most models go wrong quickly at the margins when pushed beyond their normal envelope. Climate models for example are the worst ones in use today.

To: J_F_Shepard who wrote (587512)	9/27/2010 7:22:01 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1572207

.but the validity is not questionable if the model correctly shows what will happen to an economy when variables are plugged in and the result predicts actual behavior. 1 - The models have not been so good at predicting actual behavior. 2 - In this particular case the question is the size of the stimulus effect of government spending. You can't measure what the size of the effect from the economic stats before and after the policy, because such policies are not in this case, and in fact are never, the only factor. Because of the huge numbers of variables, economic models are difficult to produce. And often in disagreement with each other, and generally unreliable. Probably becoming more unreliable the more they actually drive policy. (For example the belief that there was a long term trade off between unemployment and inflation, caused efforts against inflation to be weaker, eventually resulting in the surprise of "stagflation" with high unemployment and high inflation.) there are people on SI with no credentials critiquing astrophysicist Steven Hawking Someone isn't right or wrong depending on their credentials. Is he smarter than me? Sure. Is he more educated in the areas of physics and astronomy and math than I am? Sure. But that doesn't mean that I can't reasonably criticize anything he says, or even anything someone related to space or astronomy. For example his recently expressed worry of alien's invading for the purpose of taking Earth's resources seems rather overblown. Any civilization from another solar system that could get to Earth with enough payload to actually do anything once they get here, would be able to grab far more resources, much easier, elsewhere. There might be specific exceptions. If they like Earth like planets, and such planets are rare, I suppose they could invade to take over the real estate. They could invade to enslave us (probably more for cultural reasons than practical ones, an interstellar civilization is probably advanced enough not to need our slave labor). They could assimilate us in to their empire "for our own good". They could fear our eventual potential and wipe us out to avoid it. But bulk materials and energy? Nothing here (except for products of life which they could probably synthesize from widely available resources), that they can't get in greater quantities for less effort, elsewhere.