tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6704573462403312459.post3166610365287114477..comments2024-03-28T06:53:23.473-04:00Comments on Moneyness: Ethereum is full of ponzis, is that a problem?JP Koninghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02559687323828006535noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6704573462403312459.post-51206346233474198912018-06-03T11:47:28.342-04:002018-06-03T11:47:28.342-04:00The value (enjoyment) provided by these games can ...The value (enjoyment) provided by these games can be divorced from anything pecuniary. If you sit down with a friend and play a match, you are not doing it because you expect to win money. Try a nonpecuniary lottery: it's free to play, we draw random numbers, and if you match them: congrats, you win nothing. I don't think it would be nearly as appealing as a "real" lottery.<br /><br />Hm... I was about to say "that's why these games are really selling a(n imaginary) pecuniary return, that people _way_ overvalue". Perhaps the solution would be to allow shorting the lottery? Then its price would be the expected value + the market-determined volatility premium.<br />____________________________________________<br /><br />A different take is to say: if lots of people tendentiously overestimated their odds, and lost their money on betting they will win the match, I'd oppose poker. Because then it would be the case that poker-for-money was somehow built around exploiting a mistake of thinking; a superstimulus with harmful side effects.Basil Martehttp://users.itk.ppke.hu/~marba1noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6704573462403312459.post-12213078297072939842018-06-03T00:26:49.828-04:002018-06-03T00:26:49.828-04:00"In my opinion, gambling and other negative-e..."In my opinion, gambling and other negative-expected-value stuff are either straight-up bads..."<br /><br />Poker too? Or bridge? Chess? What about playing tennis? One person wins a tennis game, another loses, and they have to each pay a fee to play. But both players come out ahead because it's a fun way to pass the time. I don't see why poker or other types of gambling are any different. I suppose that any game played in excess becomes a bad. And that's when education is important, and organizations who can help addicts break the cycle. JP Koninghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02559687323828006535noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6704573462403312459.post-49086406662410119152018-06-02T21:23:35.606-04:002018-06-02T21:23:35.606-04:00New Gaming Boom: Newzoo Ups Its 2017 Global Games ...New Gaming Boom: Newzoo Ups Its 2017 Global Games Market Estimate to $116.0Bn Growing to $143.5Bn in 2020<br /><br />Nouriel Roubini:<br /><br />Indeed the top DApps are Ponzi/Pyramid Schemes, silly or casino games... what a brilliant success for Ethereum after raising $10bn of funds form clueless investors! <br /><br />1 billion of the investment may have been be justified for game and casinos. Not anymore, that was then.Matt Younghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08404998406161097199noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6704573462403312459.post-79251916297866494752018-06-02T12:52:33.765-04:002018-06-02T12:52:33.765-04:00"I think people should have a right to be stu..."I think people should have a right to be stupid and, if they have that right, the market's going to respond by supplying as much stupidity as can be sold."---Greg Burch<br />The second half is known as Burch's law.<br /><br />In my opinion, gambling and other negative-expected-value stuff are either straight-up bads, or ...have a negative "externality" that falls on the consumer? (If you do composition over society, it doesn't matter whether it's really external.) Thus imposing a deadweight loss on them can be socially beneficial. Especially if the "ban elasticity of demand" is high, because then the equilibrium quantity falls sharply enough to make up for the fact that the remaining consumers get an even worse deal. Pigovian taxes could work as well.<br /><br />My preferred solution is to educate people, so that they don't want lotteries and other negative-expected-value games in the first place. I readily admit that my views on education are unusual; if I were to decide on what the high school curriculum contained, I would introduce basic economics, among others. How can we expect people to participate meaningfully in policy debates, if they don't understand the policies and the arguments? How can they understand the congestion charge, if they don't have the faintest idea what the tragedy of the commons is? Absent that idea, they tend to think of VMT as an exogenously given variable and thus oppose it. They see it as an attempt at rent-seeking.Basil Martehttp://users.itk.ppke.hu/~marba1noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6704573462403312459.post-47177599714005030832018-06-02T09:47:39.273-04:002018-06-02T09:47:39.273-04:00Gotta love the blogosphere.
Eliezer Yudkowsky doe...Gotta love the blogosphere.<br /><br />Eliezer Yudkowsky doesn't like the fact that people have preferences for playing lotteries. I find this predilection unfortunate too. I would never throw away my money on a lottery ticket. And I tell my friends and family the same.<br /><br />But what are the options? Ban it? Then people will try to find underground lotteries, and these will be even worse. I suspect that Yudkowsky's New Improved Lottery is tongue in cheek, but if it isn't--that's probably the right approach. Try to improve the existing lottery model. JP Koninghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02559687323828006535noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6704573462403312459.post-84300544315793998002018-06-01T07:32:05.289-04:002018-06-01T07:32:05.289-04:00"it's no different from the public's ..."it's no different from the public's demand to play poker or lotteries. For many people these games are a fun escape from reality, a chance to fantasize about making a big win."<br />I cannot put it eloquently enough, but others have: www.lesswrong.com/s/FrqfoG3LJeCZs96Ym/p/QawvGzYWhqdyPWgBLBasil Martehttp://users.itk.ppke.hu/~marba1noreply@blogger.com