>> [broken economy, can't stop playing]
> 'tis the voters' fault, though, isn't it? The quants didn't ask for the system to be the way it is.
Not the voters. Voting can't fix anything because politicians can't be held to their campaign promises.
But it is the citizens' fault in that we don't do something about the existing laws that cover this malfeasance that aren't being used to stop it, or more importantly, about how voting doesn't work.
> If anything, they, by exploiting this flaw, act to expose it, making it more visible and more likely to be fixed.
That line of reasoning is only valid if those same quants would accept me emptying out their bank accounts by exploiting some bank vulnerability. (Such as your birthday and mother's maiden name always being used as the master identity check.)
> the government would be -forced- to give up on its newfound policy of Too Big to Fail.
Reality based government. Sigh. That would be nice. I thought they always had that policy where banks were concerned though?
> Imagine if more grad students did this.
If they were trying to bring it down, like exploiting a security flaw to get it fixed, it would only take one.
> academics posess a level of freedom on par with the super-rich; if some University wants you to immigrate to a country in order to do research, you're waived right in.
Good point, freedom and a license for eccentricity in one package. Very helpful in a world quickly stuffing air-travelers into terrorist/not-terrorist boxes based on your sense of humor inside the airport, etc.
> A PhD carries the sort of international mobility that's I think is kind of useful having been born in a sinking ship.
Makes me think of the Titanic, too big to sink!
Got any idea where to go? Start a hacker/scientist enclave in an abandoned mine?