Market of Strategic Information Slash Influence Is Too Right!
A small news item July 29th, pg. A12 deserved more attention. "Pentagon betting plan attacked" was a fair title for the disturbing program aimed at intelligence gathering but too little useful information was provided. In such a system, traders would and apparently (in some cases) already do, bet on outcomes of foreign policy, elections and military actions. Other sources (MSNBC) indicate it would start with 100 experts and expand, then the sponsors DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency) claim that they would not be able to identify traders who sign up.
It sounds similar to the former fiasco Office of Strategic Information/Influence, now titled a Futures Market. Reports on 9-11 have indicated the poor handling of the volume of Intelligence that was already there and now they expect to have help from the economic forecasting arena? Not to mention the idea that misinformation that was hypothetically strategically planted somehow missed processing by any Office in the Administration that would keep things straight.
Markets may be efficient indicators of the futures, but they may be too efficient for interpretations that would be meaningful in time. Setting aside the aspect that DARPA would be sponsoring or turning a blind eye to insider trading, which would admittedly be a required component, how would they separate trading by terrorists from ideologues and analysts from capitalists? Not that there is anything wrong with some of that.
Efficiency would have been if voters had taken warning from the markets (in 2000) at the risk of a Bush election.
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query information market. Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query information market. Sort by date Show all posts
Monday, August 04, 2003
Thursday, March 19, 2009
Who knew what when...
...is still unclear and contradictory.
(Update became too long and windy so I overlap here)
<< Correcting an Impression (1): still confusion(2). My own missing (3) link.
Apparently $30 Billion latest AIG potential for drawdown has been caught in this confusion and is potential leverage. Who knew what when is still unclear and contradictory. >>
(1) "Congress last month passed a bill that President Obama signed into law, allowing AIG to keep its bonuses. For days, no one would say who was responsible for the loophole that let that happen.
The $787 billion stimulus bill included a measure from Dodd to limit executive bonuses strictly. But slipped inside at the last minute was an exemption for bonuses agreed to "on or before February 11, 2009." That allowed AIG to go ahead with its controversial bonuses."
(2) "Although Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner told congressional leaders on Tuesday that he learned of AIG's impending $160 million bonus payments to members of its troubled financial-products unit on March 10, sources tell TIME that the New York Federal Reserve informed Treasury staff that the payments were imminent on Feb. 28."
(3)"The federal government agreed Sunday night to provide an additional $30 billion in taxpayer money to the American International Group and loosen the terms of its huge loan to the insurer, which is preparing to report a $62 billion loss on Monday, the biggest quarterly loss in history, people involved in the discussions said."
<> Date of sources: (1)today 3-19 (2) yesterday 3-18 (3)Sunday 3-1-09 <>
Imagine the scenario that the market actually had the information clear. The above confusion occurred likely due to the compartmentalization* of information and actions needed to be taken over a weekend. I am still uncertain about the spurious charges of "hush money" in regards to the "retention" bonuses but it is difficult to expect too much transparency** in such market sensitive negotiations or even authoritarian (or mob rule) expectations for responsibility.***
* and filtering through various departments, committees and branches of the process, including the media
**this does not excuse the outrage over bonuses but the speed that was needed and
is in contrast to previous manipulations or administrations and telegraphing our blows.
***(not to mention "...rotisserie of meaning and values and what is being skewered or brings stock aid to mind.": see P.S. verse us alternatives )
[Yes I played with verses as opposed to stocks versus stockade mentality]
[Footnoted Outrage: Between the lines: Embedded and bottom line.
A.I.G. Using "Suicide Strategy" to Push Bonuses by: Matt Renner, t r u t h o u t | Report
Venality Bites by: Brian E. Gray, t r u t h o u t | Perspective A synergy of strategy and legality and antagonistic con fluency of Authoritarian and Mob Rule.]
(Update became too long and windy so I overlap here)
<< Correcting an Impression (1): still confusion(2). My own missing (3) link.
Apparently $30 Billion latest AIG potential for drawdown has been caught in this confusion and is potential leverage. Who knew what when is still unclear and contradictory. >>
(1) "Congress last month passed a bill that President Obama signed into law, allowing AIG to keep its bonuses. For days, no one would say who was responsible for the loophole that let that happen.
The $787 billion stimulus bill included a measure from Dodd to limit executive bonuses strictly. But slipped inside at the last minute was an exemption for bonuses agreed to "on or before February 11, 2009." That allowed AIG to go ahead with its controversial bonuses."
(2) "Although Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner told congressional leaders on Tuesday that he learned of AIG's impending $160 million bonus payments to members of its troubled financial-products unit on March 10, sources tell TIME that the New York Federal Reserve informed Treasury staff that the payments were imminent on Feb. 28."
(3)"The federal government agreed Sunday night to provide an additional $30 billion in taxpayer money to the American International Group and loosen the terms of its huge loan to the insurer, which is preparing to report a $62 billion loss on Monday, the biggest quarterly loss in history, people involved in the discussions said."
<> Date of sources: (1)today 3-19 (2) yesterday 3-18 (3)Sunday 3-1-09 <>
Imagine the scenario that the market actually had the information clear. The above confusion occurred likely due to the compartmentalization* of information and actions needed to be taken over a weekend. I am still uncertain about the spurious charges of "hush money" in regards to the "retention" bonuses but it is difficult to expect too much transparency** in such market sensitive negotiations or even authoritarian (or mob rule) expectations for responsibility.***
* and filtering through various departments, committees and branches of the process, including the media
**this does not excuse the outrage over bonuses but the speed that was needed and
is in contrast to previous manipulations or administrations and telegraphing our blows.
***(not to mention "...rotisserie of meaning and values and what is being skewered or brings stock aid to mind.": see P.S. verse us alternatives )
[Yes I played with verses as opposed to stocks versus stockade mentality]
[Footnoted Outrage: Between the lines: Embedded and bottom line.
A.I.G. Using "Suicide Strategy" to Push Bonuses by: Matt Renner, t r u t h o u t | Report
Venality Bites by: Brian E. Gray, t r u t h o u t | Perspective A synergy of strategy and legality and antagonistic con fluency of Authoritarian and Mob Rule.]
Friday, February 13, 2009
"a royal huff"
"Our Addiction to Fake Outrage": Could it be self-righteousness or open markets?* Information should be free flowing but...needs a filter not a Drudge. That is the dilemma: who?
Certainly not trickle down; talk about "bucket shops".
Progressive Strategies: Social Darwinism? Forgetting nature and God.
People forget to credit their environment, and take for granted what they got and expect others in different environments to do as well and take the blame for theirs. Shoe is on the other foot, or foot in mouth, shoot it. Grass is greener, blah, blah, blah, dot, dot, dot,** etc.
* the nature of information is that what shocks, gets attention (and awe), and feeds the market, rather than information that puts things together which is more complicated, much like the difference between war and nation building. On top of that to expect government not to have harder work to create laws and execute them(laws not people) and then the difficulty of the fourth branch has certainly not evolved in a straight line.
** another word for fertilizer is making the rounds
Certainly not trickle down; talk about "bucket shops".
Progressive Strategies: Social Darwinism? Forgetting nature and God.
People forget to credit their environment, and take for granted what they got and expect others in different environments to do as well and take the blame for theirs. Shoe is on the other foot, or foot in mouth, shoot it. Grass is greener, blah, blah, blah, dot, dot, dot,** etc.
* the nature of information is that what shocks, gets attention (and awe), and feeds the market, rather than information that puts things together which is more complicated, much like the difference between war and nation building. On top of that to expect government not to have harder work to create laws and execute them(laws not people) and then the difficulty of the fourth branch has certainly not evolved in a straight line.
** another word for fertilizer is making the rounds
Tuesday, March 13, 2012
Framing Narratives
Don't even Think of an Elephant!
The gist of this riff?
*** an example of spin: former quote actually in latter link.
(warning under "anything" (maybe)requires Facebook membership)
[Oops, see comments, and cartoon.]
Under "never mind" I have now read the latter and the former maybe later. The "mind" is a very academic place. The "never" a more pragmatic problem under the umbrella of our creators. Whether I ever get to read the "git mo" piece may be irrelevant. The point germinates from our "Try Angle" and the dilemma of transparency and the dangers of ab-solutions. (pun on absolutes) [I don't think absolute freedom of information is possible, let alone pragmatic. But the emphasis it on "absolute", as well as a careful reading of our architectural documents, which I believe lay the organic groundwork for progress, as opposed to Jeramiahs(^). Critics of the president must realize that he is responsible whether Congress frames the right tools or the Global Village (let alone Supreme Court) goes along. Yet I am still digesting James Fallows take here, where ultimately it is our choice to choose forward or Re-verse. C- Elephant (3)]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)