Physical economy v social economy

September 17, 2010

There’s a hole in the bucket of traditional economics. Homo socialus seems to be on the rise, and homo economicus is getting harder to find.

Vulcanism has become evident in the R community over the last several days.  One of the visible eruptions has been over money.  This resulted in a blog post by Tal Galili Why R developers shouldn’t be paid that includes three great videos.

This matters to fund management.  If your theory maintains that Wikipedia can’t even exist, then your predictions for Microsoft’s encyclopedia might be slightly off.

I must admit that I’m quite confused by the whole issue.  I don’t think the world is going to go back to “normal” though just because I don’t understand.

Leave a Reply

  1. Tal Galili 2010-09-17 at 08:58 - Reply

    Thank you for the link, and the intellectual honesty regarding your confusion – we are on the same boat.

    p.s: install the WP plugin subscribe to comments.

    Cheers 🙂
    Tal

Related posts

  • April 2, 2012

    If equity markets suddenly sprang into existence now, would we create market indices? I'm doubtful. Why an index? The Dow Jones Industrial Average was born in 1896.  This was [...]

  • March 26, 2012

    The missing link between beta and volatility is correlation. Previously "4 and a half myths about beta in finance" attempted to dislodge several myths about beta, including that beta [...]

  • March 23, 2012

    Does minimum variance act differently from low volatility?  Do either of them act like low beta?  What about high volatility versus high beta? Inspiration Falkenblog had a post investigating [...]