Tuesday, July 30, 2013


Moral: Wherein we leave Ben alone for awhile and see what ought to be important to the future so that we have the best for the most.

As in, no economic torture (one type), for one thing. There is a lot more to look at.


Earlier, we mentioned a few blogs. We have some on a blog roll. Today, via the CACM (member of ACM since the 1970s), I found another that I'm adding to the blog roll: econfuture| Future Economics and Technology.

The topic of the blog, Economics and Technology, deals with important issues. The particular post that I first saw asks this question: Could Robots and Automation cause an Unemployment Crisis? The post has a link to the CACM article (nice, thanks).


This post is mainly to point to the blog and to change the subject of focus, for awhile. I worked in applied AI (think of this being analogous to applied mathematics) since the early 80s. The particular discipline was Knowledge-Based Engineering (I consider myself a KBEvangelist, of sorts - except, perhaps, I've broadened the basis, of late). I was involved with a wide-range of applications, heavily involved with applying mathematically-based computing. From this, my look at truth engineering was a natural flow.

Aside: My degrees are in economics during which study I emphasized the overlap between economics, mathematics, and computing. The leaning toward AI came from an interest in the development of cybernetics. See this little section, that I wrote, about some thoughts on where KBE might go. Note, please, that engineering is being looked at as applied science (yin/yang). The computer? It does a lot of water muddying; essentially, things get topsy-turvy, thereby (see quasi-empiricism, operational aspects).


So, let's end, for now, with the consideration of near zero being said as of importance. That is to show, of course. Too, all this running after computational assists is problematic from many senses and sides. We'll get to that, folks. In other words. the economy, as defined by markets (especially those of the chimera type), are a house of cards.

Now, one future employment opportunity will be to ride these things. Think of it this way. We have idiots now, pushing out what they see as advanced systems, who have no idea of the side-effects of these things. You see, as long as it fills the pockets of the right people, then who cares? Or, who can fight big pockets?

Aside: Being, which currently is  being suppressed in these realms - as in, no consideration given, thereof, always wins. This is not metaphysically driven, either. It's the reality that has not allowed itself to be over-layed with our mathematical constraints (we'll get to this again).


Now, the issue of who will the be bull rider is complicated. There will be a whole lot of intuition involved (trained, of course). Too, though, there very well will be non-elite players. You know, what I am referring has not been recognized, nor looked at, except, perhaps, for some little nuances being looked at by forward thinkers. My hope is that the likes of the elite (of certain types, for now), like the Harvards, will get into the game. To do so will require them to consider that autodidacts aren't silly willies crying "wolf" (or bemoaning lack of genetic makeup, educational opportunities, and the whole list of other things what can lead a person's life to the less than desirable).


As we have seen with the web, all sorts have made money, and success (other types), without the imposition of the top-heavy academic regimen. Non-elite contributions will become a central core issue.

Aside: Any consumer driven economy must allow for means for those consumer's to do their thing without the load of debt (that, folks, is a side-effect of the current regimen that went (ought to have gone) out decades ago).


02/26/2014 -- Acknowledgements for Lucio Arteaga.

08/05/2013 -- Let's see. Financial Engineering needs some attention. Perhaps, with the likes of MIT involved, this discipline can learn to lead the way out of the morass. Expect more on this topic. If things continue as they are, markets will be pure chimera (as in, ca-pital-sinos). Investors? We'll go on about that, too. It's guaranteed that most in the equity markets will lose. Why is that not talked about by those heads we see daily yakking on TV and newer media? No, they would rather go gaga (apologies to the Lady). So, we'll have to address this issue: the point (price) at which loss outweighs any gains to date. All cannot sell to make a profit. Now, there is a way that all could sell high (government as the buyer of last resort - Ben has been doing this, albeit with bonds - yet, it frees up money that can go to equities -- government? of course, taxpayers). We'll have to look at the misuse of mathematics; plus, doers need to be brought back to a respectful position.

07/31/2013 -- Ben cannot unwind or taper downhe has too many Doves.

07/30/2013 -- Oh yes, Watson, and its ilk, will require some thoughtful consideration. You know, that whole thrust makes the human-oriented issues more important.

Modified: 02/26/2014

Thursday, July 11, 2013


Moral: Wherein we consider that Ben went goo-goo, and the markets went gaga.


Actually, some of his buddies talked sweetly to the addicts, to boot.


Yet, I had another face slap, yesterday. Or, watched it happen to someone else. By this time, going into five years and more, with no end in sight, it's beginning to feel like torture to savers to be so treated.

And, some guy after a position (FBI? -- look it up) says that he thinks that water boarding is torture. That is, some such headline passed before my vision the other day while I was working at the computer. What does Dick think of that?


Yet, Ben wants the ca-pital-sino to keep running. He knows where that money is going: to those run the system, those who are allowed to rake off the top, those with insider information, and more. Many think that we learned nothing from that last downturn (not last month, five or so years ago).


09/17/2014 -- Yes, she did. The coo-coo, goo-goo goes on. The landscape is strewn with the lifeless bodies of the savers. Thanks, Janet.

12/19/2013 -- Ben did his parting shot (whimper that it was); they're going to taper slowly, less than a 1/8th on the bond buy, starting next month. And, he's going to torture savers for another year or so. We'll have to see how the pieces fall. The markets got heavily seeded today in hopes of luring in the idiots and moms/pops (who cannot afford the pending losses). So, it's pop, fizz, ..., again. Too, we'll see more goo-goo talk to the immature markets and the addicted investors thereof. One of many technical issues that we'll have to get into: Nanex's view.

12/05/2013 -- If only Ben would put a shot across the bow.

08/21/2013 -- I was wrong. I thought that Ben would go goo-goo, again, as his doves want him to do. But, there is talk of a taper, albeit slowly. Sheesh. No one does "cold turkey" anymore? That's how I quit smoking. Why is it that the FED feeds addiction (that's a monetary policy?)? Now, when does the slapping the face silly quit?

08/07/2013 -- Investors? After the last taper talk (more than a month ago), things jiggled a bit. Some lost money. Some gnashed their teeth (but, for someone, like my ilk, who has been slapped silly for several years now, what comfort ought we give to those who don't know how to wean themselves from their addiction? --- in the meantime, Ben, we, the savers (saviors?), continue to be good citizens despite the Fed's attempt to trample us under the dirt). At that time, Ben had his Doves talk goo-goo. So, the mania began again. Yesterday, there was a slight downturn supposedly as some Hawk (or two) said, perhaps, next month there might be some fiddling with the taper (the talk wasn't that the investor would get reamed - forgive me, I was in the U.S.Army at 17 and learned some good lessons -- also, I was a medic so I know of orifices, to boot). Ben's problem is that he's in a fog (who isn't?). Yet, he runs around with the elite like an oracle (he ought to consider some of the Prophets about which he knows, perhaps), strokes the addicts, bends in to the money'd, and more. And, he looks for signs (omen analyzer -- ah, age-old behavior). And, he misses the obvious. For instance, what they're calling jobs (related to his triggers) are really just glorified indentured servancy roles. In fact, these things are to drive a consumer-oriented economy? ...

07/18/2013 -- Saw a review of Stockman's book and read a little about a discussion with him. One thing that I didn't know was the David has gone to Harvard's Divinity School. Interesting. So, did he have a road to Damascus type of thing? Or, was it that he got caught in the deals that was the thing? You see, the whole framework stinks. I'm sure that Ben knows this. He talks markets, as if this means something. He knows that the majority amount of energy given pertains to gaming and exploiting the system. What value is that to ourselves and our economy? Think of it. He's stiffed savers now for a long time and says that he'll continue. BTW, going back to near zero, what gain is there that means anything if what you are looking at comes from people bellying up to the bar with their money? Ponzi ran that type of thing, too. Then, sellers who win do so, for the most part, from the fact that there is more money coming in. Earnings? That's so silly for grown people to talk about rationally. So, Stockman doesn't like Ben's take on the matter. I would believe Stockman more if I hadn't know that he was in the game, too. Ben, you need to talk to someone who is outside the game and has a good grasp on the matter.

Modified: 09/17/2014