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

Monetizing Stupid

contemporaryidiot.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–36 of 36 posts

Re: Monetizing Stupid

#31

Post by [deleted] »

dcow wrote: post #18
lern_too_spel wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The author's point seems to be that applying astrology to any decisions (not markets in particular) is stupid, speculating on crypto is stupid, and combining the two will give you an audience of especially stupid people who are willing to part with their money.

Markets are human things. If a non-zero subset of humans turn to astrology (as Maren's 1MM+ followers might suggest), even if only partially, when making any decision, wouldn't it be reasonable and quite rational to think that the market might actually move in relation to astrology events if enough of these "stupid" people are participating? Wouldn't that be the "smart" conclusion?

[deleted]

Re: Monetizing Stupid

#32

Post by jfengel »

DoreenMichele wrote: post #21
SahAssar wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> For all we know Elon times his tweets to key horoscope events That does not make it any less or more wrong. If someone takes actions to make the stock market fit horoscopes that does not make the horoscopes better or worse at predicting those actions.

Actual serious students of astrology: "The stars incline; they do not compel" The rest of the world: "If you believe in astrology, you think you can know the future."

Whether they incline or compel, it would produce some measurable effect. It's easier to detect that effect if they compel, but even with an inclination, it's possible to demonstrate it statistically.

Analogy: a weighted die doesn't always turn up 6. The weight inclines, but does not compel. Still, if you roll it a lot and take the average, you can tell that something is wrong if the average is something other than 3.5.

As far as I have heard, studies have repeatedly demonstrated that the stars neither incline nor compel.

Re: Monetizing Stupid

#33

Post by DoreenMichele »

jfengel wrote: post #32
DoreenMichele wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actual serious students of astrology: "The stars incline; they do not compel" The rest of the world: "If you believe in astrology, you think you can know the future."

Whether they incline or compel, it would produce some measurable effect. It's easier to detect that effect if they compel, but even with an inclination, it's possible to demonstrate it statistically. Analogy: a weighted die doesn't always turn up 6. The weight inclines, but does not compel. Still, if you roll it a lot and take the average, you can tell that something is wrong if the average is something other than 3.…

I would be interested in seeing a list of studies you have read on the topic.

Please and thank you.

Re: Monetizing Stupid

#34

Post by jfengel »

DoreenMichele wrote: post #33
jfengel wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whether they incline or compel, it would produce some measurable effect. It's easier to detect that effect if they compel, but even with an inclination, it's possible to demonstrate it statistically. Analogy: a weighted die doesn't always turn up 6. The weight inclines, but does not compel. Still, if you roll it a lot and take the average, you can tell that something is wrong if the average is something other than 3.…

I would be interested in seeing a list of studies you have read on the topic. Please and thank you.

There is a Wikipedia page on the subject. It's heavily footnoted with links to the studies.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astrology_and_science

Re: Monetizing Stupid

#35

Post by DoreenMichele »

jfengel wrote: post #34
DoreenMichele wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would be interested in seeing a list of studies you have read on the topic. Please and thank you.

There is a Wikipedia page on the subject. It's heavily footnoted with links to the studies. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astrology_and_science

Thank you.

Re: Monetizing Stupid

#36

Post by dcow »

jfengel wrote: post #34
DoreenMichele wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would be interested in seeing a list of studies you have read on the topic. Please and thank you.

There is a Wikipedia page on the subject. It's heavily footnoted with links to the studies. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astrology_and_science

I would note that here we are talking about markets, not the types of things the linked article references as having been studied statistically. I don’t think anybody disagrees that there is absolutely zero scientific basis to astrology and its relevance in the physical world whatsoever. But that’s not the question. The question is whether an occult belief system can cause measurable effects in markets, which are not related in any way to the real world and purely derived from human sentiment.
Post reply on HN