MIT Unravels the Secrets Behind Collective Intelligence • Hacker News Board

Re: MIT Unravels the Secrets Behind Collective Intelligence

#21

Post by lotharbot » Sat, Aug 27, 2011, 4:40 PM UTC

Bud wrote: post #12

learc83 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow I'd really like to see some data to back up these assertions. Did they correct for poor welfare moms, blue collar union workers, or Muslims? To think that only Tea party members and Christian fundamentalists are the only ones who might not understand or have a problem with the scientific method is absurd. I really doubt your average 20 year old wearing a Che shirt cares any more about the scientific method than y…

Not ridiculous at all, although very predictable that this would be downvoted and controversial. I didn't say "only" Tea Party folks or fundies, so I'd appreciate not being misquoted. I also didn't say anything about "understanding" the scientific method. I think a lot of those folks understand it quite well; they just choose to cynically lie about it for political reasons, which is the crucial difference here. You b…

I wouldn't use the term "controversial" to describe your post. Instead, I'd say you made a pointless, unnecessary, partisan attempt to drag emotional baggage into the thread. You've been on Hacker News for over a year; you should know better than to engage in such douchebaggery.

Re: MIT Unravels the Secrets Behind Collective Intelligence

#22

Post by yummyfajitas » Sun, Aug 28, 2011, 2:13 AM UTC

gwern wrote: post #20

yummyfajitas wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have a citation for this? If true, it's counterintuitive - one would expect the risk-tolerant investors to have higher returns.

The way I remember it, it was simply that men traded more and so the fees (combined with some bad choices) damaged their returns: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.145...

This paper is based on retail investors at a discount brokerage, not asset managers.

Re: MIT Unravels the Secrets Behind Collective Intelligence

#23

Post by gwern » Sun, Aug 28, 2011, 2:26 PM UTC

yummyfajitas wrote: post #22

gwern wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The way I remember it, it was simply that men traded more and so the fees (combined with some bad choices) damaged their returns: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.145...

This paper is based on retail investors at a discount brokerage, not asset managers.

Who we would expect to be immune to the issues of their gender... why? I bet if you look, there are similar results for managers, that those who trade more damage their returns.

Re: MIT Unravels the Secrets Behind Collective Intelligence

#24

Post by yummyfajitas » Mon, Aug 29, 2011, 1:07 AM UTC

gwern wrote: post #23

yummyfajitas wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This paper is based on retail investors at a discount brokerage, not asset managers.

Who we would expect to be immune to the issues of their gender... why? I bet if you look, there are similar results for managers, that those who trade more damage their returns.

Because the asset managers who are not immune to the problems of retail investors get fired very quickly.

Just as it is hard to generalize from your average facebook user to programmers, it is hard to generalize from retail investors to professional traders.