News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Statistical mechanics of money (2000). Parent comment

Re:Statistical mechanics of money (2000) by qubex on Tuesday April 02, 2019 @07:03AM (#19552801)
I'm arguing a bit more, actually: that the phase-space itself can form the basis for higher-abstraction phase-spaces, and so on almost ad infinitum, and thus provide an almost inexhaustible supply of potential ownership.

A meta-fund that owns equity in a fund that invests in securities issued by owners of multiple pop-culture IP franchises? No problem.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Statistical mechanics of money (2000) by SiempreViernes on Tuesday April 02, 2019 @08:28AM (#19553292)
What is a higher-abstraction phase space? For me the natural interpretation would be something that encodes phase space in a smaller representation, but that is clearly not what you have in mind...

In any case, I don't see why positions and correlations between different particles shouldn't be considered "real", so that's arbitrary stacking of ownership brought down to earth.

In fact, wasn't subprime to a large degree about falsely claimed correlations? That is to say the derivatives implicitly assumed things that weren't true, or in other words secretly left reality behind.

[ Parent | on HN ]