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 18, 2011

    How well do asset weight constraints constrain risk? The setup In "Unproxying weight constraints" I claimed that many constraints on asset weights are really a proxy for constraining risk. [...]

  • April 14, 2011

    Four hundred years ago today Galileo Galilei brought forth a new instrument.  On 1611 April 14 Galileo did a demo of his telescope in Rome. That bit of glass [...]

  • April 13, 2011

    It is common practice to have portfolio constraints like: wi ≤ 0.05 That is, the weight of each asset can be no more than 5%. Proxy for risk We [...]