News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:A New Aristocracy [pdf] by SamReidHughes on Thursday August 20, 2015 @11:25AM (#10092434)
Incentive isn't u'(x), it's more like u'(x)/u(x).

Scaling u''(x) doesn't change inequality anyway (as defined by measurements of u(b)/u(a) or the Gini index) so it's a poor stand-in for the kind of convexity people are complaining about.

Re:A New Aristocracy [pdf] by yummyfajitas on Thursday August 20, 2015 @12:17PM (#10092805)
The incentive is how much your utility increases - between state B and state A, that's u(B)-u(A) = u'(h)(B-A). Take limits and you get to u'(x) for marginal estimates.

Inequality is most definitely NOT defined by ratios of a utility function. The convexity of the OP was in the utility function; he seemed to believe that convexity of reward (and hence of utility, assuming u(reward) is monotonic) would only increase the reward for those at the top.

Re:A New Aristocracy [pdf] by SamReidHughes on Thursday August 20, 2015 @03:09PM (#10093953)
Maybe you should have made clear in your post, then, that u is utility, not income. If u is utility and v is income, then v'(x)/v(x) ~ u'(x), more or less. Most measures of inequality involve dollar ratios, which seem to correspond to differences in utility, or at least to self-reported happiness.