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

  • February 20, 2012

    We know the words but what do they mean? Some definitions Here are some definitions of "passive investment management". Investopedia says: A style of management associated with mutual and [...]

  • February 16, 2012

    Version 1.01 of BurStFin is now on CRAN. It is written entirely in R, and meant to be compatible with S+. Functionality The package is aimed at quantitative finance, [...]

  • February 13, 2012

    How fat tailed are returns, and how does it change over time? Previously The sister post of this one is "A slice of S&P 500 skewness history". Orientation The [...]