MadamMillie Posted July 30 Report Share Posted July 30 un f'ing believablehttp://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/30/politics/30TERR.html?hpwow...someone really fucked up there Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
revaluation Posted July 30 Report Share Posted July 30 I listened to the Senate hearing yesterday and I was fuckin floored by that shit. I had never heard of it before. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kken Posted July 30 Report Share Posted July 30 I want to invest in an options trading system on the different threat levels pete poses to hisself on any given night. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rockyblue Posted July 30 Report Share Posted July 30 omg, this is rediculous. poindexter needs to be removed pronto. although, considering rumsfeld is the only one who can do it, i doubt it'll happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
revaluation Posted July 30 Report Share Posted July 30 Originally posted by kken I want to invest in an options trading system on the different threat levels pete poses to hisself on any given night. Obnoxiously drunk - 2:1Kicked out of the club - 9:1Forget his credit card - 7:2Mugged - 25:1Fall down - EvenPose no risk - 23,458,972:1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shadygroovedc Posted July 30 Report Share Posted July 30 Originally posted by revaluation Obnoxiously drunk - 2:1Kicked out of the club - 9:1Forget his credit card - 7:2Mugged - 25:1Fall down - EvenPose no risk - 23,458,972:1 You forgot: Earfuck - Even odds Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teriaki Posted July 30 Report Share Posted July 30 Originally posted by shadygroovedc You forgot: Earfuck - Even odds Even?? Try 1:10 odds on favorite. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgiddy Posted July 30 Report Share Posted July 30 Originally posted by MadamMillie un f'ing believablehttp://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/30/politics/30TERR.html?hpwow...someone really fucked up there Why not? I think this is a novel idea. I wish it wasn't shot down so quickly, they didn't even give it a chance, it was done from the start. Once the media, like the NY Times get word of it and puts their own spin on it then I knew it was over. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
revaluation Posted July 30 Report Share Posted July 30 Originally posted by shadygroovedc You forgot: Earfuck - Even odds what's earfuck? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shadygroovedc Posted July 30 Report Share Posted July 30 Originally posted by revaluation what's earfuck? Pete has an uncanny ability to take a conversation way off track and will stay on his course for hours and hours no matter how hard you try to rein the conversation back on track to the original topic. That's an earfuck. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teriaki Posted July 30 Report Share Posted July 30 Originally posted by revaluation I listened to the Senate hearing yesterday and I was fuckin floored by that shit. I had never heard of it before. This should change your minds about at least the spirit of what they were proposing.Link Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
descent Posted July 30 Report Share Posted July 30 Even assuming it would work, it is still sick. Period. Not to mention that our leaders would be betting on it -- people that could very well influence the outcome. "Hey Dubyah, we got 57:2 odds that Syria will be bombed this year. Wanna make bank?" Yeah, I trust them to do it right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgiddy Posted July 30 Report Share Posted July 30 Originally posted by descent Even assuming it would work, it is still sick. Period. Not to mention that our leaders would be betting on it -- people that could very well influence the outcome. "Hey Dubyah, we got 57:2 odds that Syria will be bombed this year. Wanna make bank?" Yeah, I trust them to do it right. completely wrong and don't know if I want to get into this debate on CP, too long and complicated to explain to you guys, but don't let the media make up your mind and don't believe everything they say. There is much more to it, it's not betting on people's lives or making money off terrorism, thats not the point or what is is designed to do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teriaki Posted July 30 Report Share Posted July 30 Originally posted by pgiddy completely wrong and don't know if I want to get into this debate on CP, too long and complicated to explain to you guys, but don't let the media make up your mind and don't believe everything they say. There is much more to it, it's not betting on people's lives or making money off terrorism, thats not the point or what is is designed to do. pgiddy is right. It's way to long and complicated for CPers to understand. In all seriousness, it's more about the collection of data than "betting" on anything. It's the statistical analysis of such a large number of data points that gives the predictions relevance.Consider when you bet on a football game, and the spread is Redskins +7. More often than not, the "line" or spread is going to be very close to the final result (the end result being close to zero sum).This isn't because they have such great knowledge about football, or because their book makers are accurate. It's because of the number of data points they have in order to make the prediction. Each bettor gives them another measurement in order to set the line. This is why the line shifts as the action (money) shifts.This proposal is essentially the same thing. From the Forbes article:"The reason, economists say, is that markets are extremely efficient at aggregating information from all investors—including inside information." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shadygroovedc Posted July 30 Report Share Posted July 30 Originally posted by teriaki pgiddy is right. It's way to long and complicated for CPers to understand. "The reason, economists say, is that markets are extremely efficient at aggregating information from all investors—including inside information." The only flaw I see is that markets are good at predicting and aggregating information about herd mentality. I don't see how herd mentality has anything to do with terrorism. I could see it being used to gauge the possibilty of an assassination attempt on Arafat or something like that, but not for purely terroristic acts that are done by a few insane individuals.I don't think the project was gross, though. It's actually kind of interesting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teriaki Posted July 30 Report Share Posted July 30 Originally posted by shadygroovedc I don't think the project was gross, though. It's actually kind of interesting. And that's the point I was trying to make. I really didn't see it as being so offensive.Fortune actually reported on it February 19th, 2003. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadamMillie Posted July 30 Author Report Share Posted July 30 i'm not saying that markets arent efficient. coming from an economics background, i'm a proponent of free markets. however, you cant look at this situation in pure mathematical terms. markets are driven by humans, and as i'm sure we'll all agree, man is flawed (just look at pete:D ). anyway i do believe that something like a futures terror market would possibly incent (i know it's not a word) people to commit actions of terror or whatnot. to take the earlier example, most games have at one point or another been fixed, or at least someone has tried to fix the game to ensure he/she would come out on top.another problem i see is that it would seem to me that if anyone who put a large sum of money towards, lets say, a terrorist attack on 6/29/2005, it would seem reasonable that we (the general public or the govt at the least) would want to know why that person believed in that event, ie what kind of insider information that person had. it leads to all kinds of implications as to the motivations of the person/instituation behind the buy. eek, i should be working. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shadygroovedc Posted July 30 Report Share Posted July 30 Originally posted by MadamMillie i'm not saying that markets arent efficient. coming from an economics background, i'm a proponent of free markets. however, you cant look at this situation in pure mathematical terms. markets are driven by humans, and as i'm sure we'll all agree, man is flawed (just look at pete:D ). anyway i do believe that something like a futures terror market would possibly incent (i know it's not a word) people to commit actions of terror or whatnot. to take the earlier example, most games have at one point or another been fixed, or at least someone has tried to fix the game to ensure he/she would come out on top.another problem i see is that it would seem to me that if anyone who put a large sum of money towards, lets say, a terrorist attack on 6/29/2005, it would seem reasonable that we (the general public or the govt at the least) would want to know why that person believed in that event, ie what kind of insider information that person had. it leads to all kinds of implications as to the motivations of the person/instituation behind the buy. eek, i should be working. Yes, you SHOULD be working. Don't tell me you hazed me all fucking day about getting your wireless connection working just so you could surf the internet! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadamMillie Posted July 30 Author Report Share Posted July 30 Originally posted by shadygroovedc Yes, you SHOULD be working. Don't tell me you hazed me all fucking day about getting your wireless connection working just so you could surf the internet! heeheebut see now i can reply to your posts:tongue: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shadygroovedc Posted July 30 Report Share Posted July 30 Originally posted by MadamMillie heeheebut see now i can reply to your posts:tongue: I don't want you to reply to my posts. I was enjoying my quiet, Millie-free existance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadamMillie Posted July 30 Author Report Share Posted July 30 Originally posted by shadygroovedc I don't want you to reply to my posts. I was enjoying my quiet, Millie-free existance. whateva...you *heart* me Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shadygroovedc Posted July 30 Report Share Posted July 30 Originally posted by MadamMillie whateva...you *heart* me I do not. I only use you for sex. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadamMillie Posted July 30 Author Report Share Posted July 30 Originally posted by shadygroovedc I do not. I only use you for sex. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shadygroovedc Posted July 30 Report Share Posted July 30 Originally posted by MadamMillie Yeah yeah yeah. We all know you don't swallow. So what. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
therunner Posted July 30 Report Share Posted July 30 yeah, that's kinda fucked up. I'd put money in it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.