scottyokim - All Comments

re: Moore's "Law" and Keynes - What if?

Anonymous — Sun, 13 Sep 2009 16:41:21 GMT

Good thought

<a href="khaldi.bnikhaled.com/.../">%C3%A3%C3%A4 ÇáãÇÖí</a>

<a href="khaldi.bnikhaled.com/.../">%C3%93%C3%AD%C3%9D Çááå ÇáãÓáæá</a>

<a href="www.bnikhaled.com/.../">%C3%A3%C3%A4%C3%8A%C3%8F%C3%AC</a>">www.bnikhaled.com/.../a>

<a href="www.bnikhaled.com/.../">%C3%A3%C3%A4%C3%8A%C3%8F%C3%AC Èäí ÎÇáÏ ÇáÑÓãí</a>

re: Mises and protein folding

k-yoke — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 19:26:25 GMT

Interesting post - especially when I compare it to a portion of an article I read just this afternoon in the most recent edition of The Economist regarding future alternative fuel uses.

There is a battery scientist @ MIT named Gerbrand Ceder who is using "extremely sophisticated computer models" in something referred to as the "materials genome project". The initial purpose of the project is to sort through the some 30,000 known inorganic chemical compounds to determine which one(s) would be best suited for an electrode. (To be used in plug-in hybrid car batteries)

The article ends by stating, "the materials genome project obviously has much wider applications than battery electrodes, but that is where Dr. Ceder has started. His computer is now chewing its way through the chemical encyclopedia, looking for the likeliest candidates."

Similar thought process with a very practical application, given $4+ gasoline. Hopefully the age of supercomputers will allow increasingly rapid solutions to a host of societal issues.

re: Social Graphs and Transparency (and Rwanda)

Srini Srinivasan — Tue, 17 Jun 2008 06:31:03 GMT

I came across your post when searching for Personal Graph. The ties that bind individuals will overcome the all baggage of misperception. At the back of our minds when we built our personal graph site(facetplay) this is what we thought would be the ideal end goal. If you have the chance check it out.

re: Mises and protein folding

pimplucius — Wed, 11 Jun 2008 15:58:19 GMT

Wonderful post.

Atoms (except hydrogen) are similar to human beings because it is impossible to calculate their energies (their desires) since each atom is has more than one electron. Protein folding models are always very simplified, using classical mechanics instead of quantum mechanics. Even for much smaller molecules, quantum mechanics states that the energy cannot be calculated exactly. So I think Schrodinger and Mises had a lot in commmon.....

re: Mises and protein folding

Stephen — Wed, 11 Jun 2008 00:13:49 GMT

No. Our actions would be determinable ahead of the time they occur iff we have perfect knowledge of all the factors influencing our will. However, since this is impossible, we can never have perfect knowledge of all of factors influencing our will. It is only in the sense that we don't know the causes of our will that we have free will.

Action presupposes causality, free will, and uncertainty. Mises addresses all of these issues in Human Action, and in greater depth in The Ultimate Foundations of Economic Science.

re: Mises and protein folding

scineram — Mon, 09 Jun 2008 14:06:47 GMT

Are these two not contradictory?

re: Mises and protein folding

Stephen — Mon, 09 Jun 2008 05:43:55 GMT

Two things.

First, our minds are a part of physical reality and must necessarily follow the same time invariant causal laws as everything else.

Secondly, a deterministic linear algebra model which describes human action is an impossibility. If we were to know the causes of our action we would already know how we would act in the future. In such a situation, we would cease to act because we would be unable to choose between alternative means. Since it is an undeniable fact that human's act, we must reject the possibility of causal determination of action.

re: The Vestigial Mind of Robert Reich

jtucker — Thu, 29 May 2008 13:02:07 GMT

That's really a great review. I can recall reading this book when it first came out, and be impressed and deeply frustrated at once. The bit about Japan is striking indeed.

re: ISO 9000 and Meta-Law

gilguillory — Tue, 06 May 2008 17:19:58 GMT

I think the key insights here are those of anarchism. The processes of adjudication result in decisions about who owns what property, restitution owed, punishments to be meted out, etc. When those processes are funded by taxation and monopolized by the state, there exist no significant incentives for the meta-process of improvement.

Gil

ISO 9000 and Meta-Law

ISO 9000 and Meta-Law — Wed, 20 Feb 2008 19:47:10 GMT

Pingback from ISO 9000 and Meta-Law

re: Social Graphs and Transparency (and Rwanda)

pairunoyd — Mon, 04 Feb 2008 03:39:56 GMT

I'd like to see barriers between business and individuals lowered. For example, there are multiple millions on the internet. Why can't businesses solicit for service A or good A and then sift submissions? Then continue. They can do business on a per transaction basis. If a particular transaction is especially favorable, they can give that service provider a special tag or what have you.

Example: Why spend millions on advertising campaigns when so much could be culled from the net masses? Even if it's not perfectly packaged it can contribute to the final product. And what about issues of efficiency? Are there not problems that can be valuably addressed by the masses?

re: Social Graphs v. Marx

IrishOutlaw — Mon, 21 Jan 2008 14:11:06 GMT

I like this idea. Hope you expand on it some more.

re: Steven Weinberg on Education

RWW — Mon, 24 Dec 2007 23:03:37 GMT

So science should be federally funded?

aaiden » The Hamakua Macadamia Nut Company

aaiden » The Hamakua Macadamia Nut Company — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 12:09:14 GMT

Pingback from aaiden » The Hamakua Macadamia Nut Company

re: Nomic: A Self-Modifying Game Based on Reflexivity in Law

robdailey — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 17:36:50 GMT

I haven't read this weeks New Yorker yet, but I am guessing that the "The Checklist" was written by Malcom Gladwell, he seems to have an interest in so called "expert systems" in medicine. (Which seems to work well from what I've read about them) If I recall correctly he wrote about diagnosic patients for chest pain to determine whether it might be a heart attack in one of his books (Blink)?. Anyway, from what I've read there already exists a "kernel" for law. Richard Mayburry www.bluestockingpress.com) wrote an excelent series of 11 ("Uncle Eric")books for high school students to understand economics, law, business, the Middle East, Europe, and American history. His book "What ever happened to justice?" explains the American Founder's belief in Natural Law, based on old brittish common law (as opposed to the system today of what he calls 'political law'). He states, "Common law was the body of definitions and principles growing out of 2 laws.

1-'Do all you have agreed to do' was the bases of common law called contract law.

2-'Do not encroach on other persons or their property' was the basis of criminal law, and tort law (tort law concerns harm done by one person to another.)"

I highly recomend you read his first three books of the series if not all of them, the will definately help you refine your thinking on economics and law. Hope this helps.