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.

Latest posts

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

  • October 14, 2013

    What good are the skewness and kurtosis of portfolios? Previously The post "Cross-sectional skewness and kurtosis: stocks and portfolios" looked at skewness and kurtosis in portfolios.  The key difference [...]

  • October 7, 2013

    Get data that fit before you fit data. Why verify? Garbage in, garbage out. How to verify The example data used here is daily (adjusted) prices of stocks.  By [...]

  • September 30, 2013

    A bit of perspective on a buzzword. The prompt The Axioma Quant Forum in London included a discussion of smart beta.  I took two highlights from it: a point [...]