Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Esther Dyson vs Bill Campbell: 2002 − 2012

longbets.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 79 posts

Re: Esther Dyson vs Bill Campbell: 2002 − 2012

#21

Post by nirvana »

DevX101 wrote: post #17

Here's an interesting long bet: Warren Buffett has bet $1M that the S&P500 will outperform hedge funds over a 10 year period. http://longbets.org/362/

Unfortunately, the details are being kept confidential, so I'm not sure what is being counted as "hedge funds". There's "hedge funds" that engage in very risky investments, ones that engage in investments that wouldn't normally be risky except that they incur counterparty risk, and then there's hedge funds that could be fundamentally very conservative, even more conservative than Buffett.

For instance, if you ran a fund that simply bought BRK shares, and, each year, bought just enough out of the money options to protect against a %10 decline in BRK, that would be a hedge fund. Buying the puts is a hedging position, but I would say that such an investment would be damn conservative, and certainly in line with Buffett's investments strategy. (He cautions against derivatives, but covering a long position with puts isn't what he means.)

Re: Esther Dyson vs Bill Campbell: 2002 − 2012

#23

Post by natrius »

jseliger wrote: post #11
javert wrote: post #5

People tend to assume that in today's era, progress is inevitable. The is a dramatic illustration to the contrary. Progress depends on a stable, pro-business system of government. Which, in turn, depends on a certain kind of underlying culture. (This is why I find Occupy Wall Street threatening.)

(This is why I find Occupy Wall Street threatening.) I do not think OWS, to the extent it has a coherent set or ideas or ideologies, is anti-business per se; I think it is opposed to the zero-sum thinking that characterizes much of Wall Street and political life right now. See, e.g.: http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_reckoning/2011/11/21/it_s_the... : In fact, blame for the failure of the congressional super committee b…

"I think it is opposed to the zero-sum thinking that characterizes much of Wall Street and political life right now."

No, I think OWS is very pro-zero-sum thinking. Its core messaging pits "the 99%" against "the 1%". It's class warfare in its purest form.

There are many smart people who are painting more reasoned critiques of our society onto OWS than the movement is actually articulating. Perhaps that's inherent to mass movements in general, but I judge OWS by its most common messages, which are far from what you've described.

There are two OWS-related messages that would have broad appeal, and I'd suggest they focus on those: "Our Laws Are Not For Sale" and "Too Big To Fail Is Too Big To Exist".

Re: Esther Dyson vs Bill Campbell: 2002 − 2012

#24

Post by timiscool999 »

dredmorbius wrote: post #6
noilly wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly... the political and economic institutions of Russia have not progressed and have likely regressed in the last 10 years. Who led Russia in 2002? Putin. Who is leading Russia in 2011/12? Still Putin and United Russia. The Litvinenko killing and Khodorkovsky imprisonment are chilling indictments of this regression. Also the run up of energy and commodity prices has only increased the allure and hold of the Dutc…

Hrm ... interesting thought: is a market dependent on financial services analogous to one dependent on natural resources? Particularly if those financial services are extractive in nature?

Maybe, but they look like two separate problems to me.

Russia's is a "resource curse": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resource_curse

Our current financial system looks more like a twist on a "rent seekers": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rent_seeking

They're kind of similar, but only because resource curse countries end up with a bunch of rent seekers and corrupt officials.

Re: Esther Dyson vs Bill Campbell: 2002 − 2012

#25

Post by jessriedel »

nirvana wrote: post #19

I found this one on bit coins: http://longbets.org/611/ Nobody has taken the other side of it. I'm skeptical (but intrigued) by bit coins, but I wouldn't take the other side of this bet, simply because bit coins have just started out and aren't yet a "fully mature form of money". That is to say, its a lot easier for a penny stock, or any other cheap commodity, to double (or outperform by 2 orders of magnitude) a glob…

The problem with longbets is that you can post a challenge without being required to accept a bet. I emailed the organization and they helpfully confirmed this.

>[Me:] "Must the makers of predictions (eventually) accept a challenger? I get the impression that several of these predictions are dubious yet have been sitting for awhile without forming a bet. It seems against the spirit of the site to allow predictors to grand stand without having to put their money where their mouth is."

>[Them:] "Predictors put their money where their mouth is by paying $50 to be published. They do not, however, have to accept challenges to their Predictions."

If it were up to me, they'd also allow bets with odds other than 50-50. Still, I think it's a great site.

Re: Esther Dyson vs Bill Campbell: 2002 − 2012

#27

Post by felipemnoa »

capkutay wrote: post #26

Dyson's right about Russia having a wealth of talent, but I'm surprised he didn't take into account the US University system and the amount of immigrant talent it attracts each year.

Good point, a lot of the best could be making their way into the USA.

Re: Esther Dyson vs Bill Campbell: 2002 − 2012

#28

Post by troymc »

capkutay wrote: post #26

Dyson's right about Russia having a wealth of talent, but I'm surprised he didn't take into account the US University system and the amount of immigrant talent it attracts each year.

The Dyson in this bet is Esther Dyson, who, last I checked, was female.

Re: Esther Dyson vs Bill Campbell: 2002 − 2012

#29

Post by jberryman »

natrius wrote: post #23
jseliger wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(This is why I find Occupy Wall Street threatening.) I do not think OWS, to the extent it has a coherent set or ideas or ideologies, is anti-business per se; I think it is opposed to the zero-sum thinking that characterizes much of Wall Street and political life right now. See, e.g.: http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_reckoning/2011/11/21/it_s_the... : In fact, blame for the failure of the congressional super committee b…

"I think it is opposed to the zero-sum thinking that characterizes much of Wall Street and political life right now." No, I think OWS is very pro -zero-sum thinking. Its core messaging pits "the 99%" against "the 1%". It's class warfare in its purest form. There are many smart people who are painting more reasoned critiques of our society onto OWS than the movement is actually articulating. Perhaps that's inherent to…

Historically invoking the term "class warfare" has been a way to scare liberals out of broaching issues of class and wealth disparity in America. Using it here makes you look like a shill.

The Occupy movement is about finally having a discussion about these issues.

Re: Esther Dyson vs Bill Campbell: 2002 − 2012

#30

Post by noahc »

peterb wrote: post #15
jseliger wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(This is why I find Occupy Wall Street threatening.) I do not think OWS, to the extent it has a coherent set or ideas or ideologies, is anti-business per se; I think it is opposed to the zero-sum thinking that characterizes much of Wall Street and political life right now. See, e.g.: http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_reckoning/2011/11/21/it_s_the... : In fact, blame for the failure of the congressional super committee b…

OWS is not against capitalism, it is against corporatism. It wants the same laws enforced weather you are rich, poor, an individual or a corporation.

Perhaps I'm nitpicking here, but I believe they don't actually want the same laws for individuals and corporations. They don't want corporations to have the same rights as individuals.
Post reply on HN