http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/07/29/ter....ap/index.html
What the hell were they thinking?
Printable View
http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/07/29/ter....ap/index.html
What the hell were they thinking?
... :rolleyes:
can people who think up these things actually exist? this has got to be some sort of a joke.
"Who's Gonna Die First?"
The Assassination Terror OTB!
Today's Experiment ...Failed
I think the WTF icon sums it up: :wtf:
Hu? :wtf:
:bs:
Hmm I didnt post this as I tought it was a joke.
So this is for real then?
Man.
If it's a joke, every paper and news site I've seen is in on it or not checking the story. It's on CNN, in various national papers, BBC, etc.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChaoofNee
:lol:
You get +10 Menchi points.
Sounds like it would make a better board game anyway. Might even be better than Head of the Class.
At least they had sense enough to nix it. Such a concept is totally grim and grotesque. I'll give this one a :wtf: x5.
Anything to make a buck...
This is one of those sad ideas that make a lot of sense, but are simultaneously too simple and too complicated for the average person to attempt to accept.
I'll try to oversimplify it. Anyways, there's something called Strong Market Efficiency that says that the price of a stock in a market reflects absolutely all information about that particular stock. The moment something happens to a company - a failure to get a patent, a facility explodes, some bug reveals itself - the positive or negative effects of that "something" immediately change that company's price. The market immediately prices out ALL information about a company - there is no "insider" information, you can never beat the market. The price of a stock is exactly what it's worth at any given time. These guys named Eugene Fama and something French wrote about the topic.
Anyways, say there was a market that priced the viability of certain days for terrorist attacks. A terrorist starts planning something, and that information peters out into the market, and ends up touching peple who invest in this "terror market". We see an uptick in a particular day and we know something is coming.
I know this all sounds terribly outlandish, but there's some really, really good research that proves that a lot of this stuff works. There was some good research on how the stock market reacted in advance of 9/11, for instance.
Even if you don't believe in Strong Market Efficiency, (and many don't), there's something called semi-strong market efficiency, that says that the market prices all publicly available information. Far more people trust Semi-Strong Market Efficiency, and simply having a tool that registers all public information would be amazingly useful, and be a huge boon to our defenses. Look up "random walk", or "strong market efficiency", or Fama, or any finance columnist that likes to take potshots at the money management industry.
Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight. :wtf:
"Holders of a futures contract that came true would collect the proceeds of traders who put money into the market but predicted wrong. "
That sounds like Butch betting on himself to win the fight in Pulp Fiction. Wouldn't take a Donald Trump to make some serious loot in a market like that. Fuck man, Lee Harvey Oswald could've assassinated JFK and recieved enough bread to be above prosecution, all in one day if we'd only been sharp enough to dream up such a well researched market back in the early sixties.
But you know what I like best? John Poindexter. I hope we all realize that that man plead GUILTY in the Iran-Contra hearings and is now head of the office setup to pry into the communications of you and me and generally just spy on us. Any thoughts on that?
Pa
Nice to know I'm such an average person who can't understand why the idea of betting on terrorist acts would help our DoHD.
So Stone, you're saying that according to SME theory, investors would have more knowledge about potential terrorist acts than our own intelligence agencies?
The idea of possible "insider trading" in this Terror Market both frightens and sickens me. If there was money to be made, it would happen sooner or later.
This could be very intelligent, actually.
Imagine... you're SAddam's current right-hand man. Put £100,000 down on him getting captured between, say, 9PM and 12PM on the 15th August and then jack his whereabouts in to the Americans at 9 on the 15th.
Take the loot, set up shop in whereever-the-hell-ever. I bet you anything that's what they're hoping will happen. :confused:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolffen
I'm not calling people "average", I'm saying that SME is a difficult concept to grasp (I had a hard time with it) because of how simple it is.
And, yes, according to SME theory, the sum total of the knowledge of all investors in the world (ie the information base that would be effecting terror market prices) would be stronger than "our own intelligence agencies" - in fact, in the first place, it would already encompass the knowledge of our intelligence agencies.
This "terror market" has very little to do with making money. This is what we'd be basing this terror market idea on:
1st. People like to make money.
2nd. People will use as much of their knowledge as possible in order to make money. If there is any way available for someone to use their knowledge to make cash, then that knowledge will eventually end up making cash, for that person or for someone they know.
If a futures market existed that would reward people for knowing when terrorist acts would happen (by allowing them to buy futures for days, before others knew about it), then people with that knowledge would use the market. If those people didn't use the futures-terror-market, then their knowledge would inevitably filter outwards, and would eventually influence someone who did use the futures-terror-market.
Those people, utilizing their knowledge about the terror, would drive prices upwards, if ever so slightly, and that would, in all likelihood, give us an indicator of something happening.
It's not quite about that.Quote:
Originally Posted by red_war_machine
The way it would work, is:
0.) All those terrorists Saddam was funding decide to attack the Embassy in Indonesia on April 19th 2004.
1.) Saddam's right hand man would hear about how they were going to attack the Embassy in Indonesia on April 19th.
2.) He wouldn't use the terror market - however, someone he knows would hear about it - maybe one, maybe two - basically his entire personal network, everyone he knows, would potentially know something, anything, about an attack happening April 19th.
3.) No one in that "personal network" uses the terror market, either. However, every one in that "personal network" then has a chance of conveying an even smaller amount of knowledge about that 4/19 attack to everyone in their own personal network. The web expands.
4.) Repeat.
5.) Repeat.
6.) Repeat.
...
XX.) By now, a massive web of people all have an extremely small chance of knowing something about the 4/19 attack. Some of those people will also know about the terror market, and given their desire to make money, they'll use whatever knowledge they have about the 4/19 attack, and they'll buy 4/19 futures on the cheap. They know something you don't, and they know that the 4/19 futures are worth more than they're priced at right now. They buy 4/19 futures.
XX+1.) As people buy 4/19 futures, the price of 4/19 futures goes up.
We now know that there's an increased potential for risk on 4/19.
This would theoretically happen much faster than you'd think it would - it'd happen virtually instantly according to SME. And, it'd work.
Heh, if you were one of those terrorists, wouldn't you have shorted TWA and Delta on 9/10/2001, or, shit, shorted everything else? Invested hard at defense stocks?Quote:
Originally Posted by PaCrappa
This is how the stock market has always worked - I don't know how the stock market reacted to JFK, but I'm quite sure it plummeted, and any savvy investor would've been able to use knowledge of JFK's assassination to make a lot of money.
The guy who shot Garrison probably had an opportunity to make money, too. This is how the market works, it's effected by the attitudes of every single investor anywhere near it. Anything negative will effect the market.
Good words, Stone. I heard of this yesterday morning on the radio and I thought it was a great idea.
It'd be a very efficient way to let any elected official know what's on people's minds. It would also be better than, say... the Lottery, since people would be using their knowledge (or lack thereof) in trying to predict the future.
You break the theory down extraordinarily well, Stone, but this sentence is the kicker for me. "Those people, utilizing their knowledge about the terror"...maybe this thing would have worked. It just sickens me that an investor, or several investors, would have knowledge, if even an inkling, that a terrorist act was coming and not inform an intelligence agency. I suppose you're implying that the knowledge would be potential subconscious, and that this market would act like an organism; the organism responds to all feedback to generate a response, and these investors would be single cells that could have a small (or possibly large) impact on that response, without knowing it. But the way you describe it, it sounds more overt than that, and that makes my stomach turn.Quote:
Those people, utilizing their knowledge about the terror, would drive prices upwards, if ever so slightly, and that would, in all likelihood, give us an indicator of something happening.
Now, if they were looking at this as a honey pot to attract shell companies of terrorists to track them down (since they would have insider knowledge), I could stomach this a little better, but only a little.
Late 90s tech bubble, nuff said.
Idiots.
And what makes them idiots, other than your vague sentence?Quote:
Originally Posted by Almaci
"Idiots."
So true. It'd only work because the world is stupid. It's just another way of insuring that the stupid status quo is maintained and that us rich folks here in America don't have to ever learn to really respect human life. Why change the world if you can just get rich off of the fucked up shit instead?
Pa
[QUOTE=Wolffen]I suppose you're implying that the knowledge would be potential subconscious, and that this market would act like an organism; the organism responds to all feedback to generate a response, and these investors would be single cells that could have a small (or possibly large) impact on that response, without knowing it. But the way you describe it, it sounds more overt than that, and that makes my stomach turn.[QUOTE]
According to the theory, the market really would be acting like a organism - terrorist individuals couldn't help but influence the market, unless they all decided to move to a completely isolated island or something.
This:
doesn't mean a damn thing.Quote:
Late 90s tech bubble, nuff said.
Being able to say that means you really, really ought to read more about SML - you've got it completely wrong and don't understand the idea at all. The randomness of SML ("random walk") is good for the average guy - not good for "the stupid status quo".Quote:
So true. It'd only work because the world is stupid. It's just another way of insuring that the stupid status quo is maintained and that us rich folks here in America don't have to ever learn to really respect human life. Why change the world if you can just get rich off of the fucked up shit instead?
This surprises you? 14 intelligence agencies and they couldn't find a fly in a glass of milk.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolffen
Markets are emotion driven as much as driven by more tangeable things.
Look at the tech bubble where worthless companies were blown up to gargantuan proportions, now couple that market system with a government who uses a silly colour coding system to put its people into a frenzy and you have all the ingredients for a circlejerk that will make markets explode into a trading frenzy.
idiocy at its finest.
Government highers the terorism alert level so markets react, government sees market reaction and claims something is definitly up so they higher the alert level some more, markets go crazy.
Insanity, only absolute idiots would think something like this would work.
Tech bubble people, tech bubble.
Dont buy into Stone his market crap, the tech bubble has already proven him wrong.
Woah Stone, wb btw.. I trust you're settled in LA, was it?
Anyway, I was just put off by the idea; just the sound of taking bets on terrorism and the potential abuse for this... But of course, you had to come in with a detailed analysis like this one to kinda change my mind ;).
EDIT: Oops, looks like I might have to heed Almaci's warning.
A convicted felon is being allowed to spy on us. That takes the fucked-up cookie. There goes our privacy, flushed right down the two Johns. :mad:Quote:
Originally Posted by PaCrappa
Poindexter resigned.
To celebrate, I have two (COUNT EM TWO) images... for you!
http://falcon.tp.devry.edu/~tmcn9298/pwnin.jpg
Seems like quite a few people would say this guy had it coming to him.
Thats one down and the rest of the Bush cabinet to go.
So you went into a big elaborate tirade to say what? Exactly what you said before - nothing but being vague. But this time, yer being fancy about it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Almaci
I may be misunderstanding Stone, but from what he's saying, a 'terror alert' would have minimal, if any impact on this 'market.' Because in a real market, insider info is always more valuable than a corporate-tightened press junket. Not to mention insider info that pans out is moreso effective, and truth in the numbers about who's making what is always better than a tanking company going 'no really, everything's fine'Quote:
Government highers the terorism alert level so markets react, government sees market reaction and claims something is definitly up so they higher the alert level some more, markets go crazy.
Insanity, only absolute idiots would think something like this would work.
Tech bubble people, tech bubble.
Dont buy into Stone his market crap, the tech bubble has already proven him wrong.
At least, in my limited understanding of the market, that's how things work. Or at least, that should be the angle of attack and demeanor to be most successful in it. So if in a 'terror' market (which still boggles me - but I'm actually trying to talk about this, not just verbally dickslap it because someone I (you) don't like is talking about something I don't find very uplifting), it should be the same. Sure, you might a have a frenzy by 'investors' who don't know better on an alert, but if it's like out normal markets, people are in the business of keeping a level head and following the real trends....which would show themselves through insider info. That's why Stone was saying this whole thing would work better than a single intelligence agency, afterall.
So why the hell do you assume he OBVIOUSLY doesn't understand that the big-bad-Wolf-USA will be able to control the ENTIRE market? He already said they wouldn't. That's like saying Martha Stewart could save her company by just saying everything's cool, even though EVERYTHING ELSE IN THE MARKET says she's up a creek.
That's what I can dig from this. I still don't like the idea of being able to keep tabs this way, no matter how effective, just because it's a larger indicator that greed can still motivate moreso than for the sake of helping. And not JUST the white-capitalist-fatcats, you fools. Greed pretty much works everywhere in everyone; be it financial, materialistic, emotional, or psychological. At the very least, while greed exists, the best one can do is manipulate it to do good.
Wow, some people need to maybe read less and get out more before they "debate" politics. Common sense is with Almaci to be sure.
AND HOOFUCKINGRAY if Poindexter resigned! I haven't the time to check any newssources to verify, but I'm quite pleased at the thought.
Pa
His resignation is "rumoured" to be coming. We can only hope. I kinda doubt TIA will go away even if he leaves though.
I concur. That's why this turns my stomach. I'm trying to figure out if I would feel better if this came out years after they had been doing it (let's assume with success), or the way we found out recently (before it really got started).Quote:
Originally Posted by Hero
Hehehe. Figures you'd say that. Don't worry Ali, I'll still be voting for him with the hope of keeping ya agitated/aggravated for another 4 long grueling years ;)...Quote:
Originally Posted by Almaci
Look - I don't even believe in strong market efficiency. What matters is that this is/was an interesting idea that demonstrated some interesting concepts, and most of the public had their heads too far up the asses to think the damn thing for a half-second before dismissing it.
It doesn't have anything to do with greed, either - it's simply human nature. We wouldn't have been giving terrorists a way to capitalize on...bah, fuck, it's not worth it.
Of course its noth worth it.
A retarded plan conceived by an admited criminal with blood on his hands who gets payed by those whose names he didnt mention to spy on you.
Yup not worth it.
Oh and Hero, once again youre reading things I have not written, nowehere did I say the US would have full control over it or whatever.
Getting Poindexter to resign is worth the death of what may or may not be a good idea.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stone
The main problem with this thing is no one understands it. While it may be a good idea in concept, it's not something they should publicize. I don't even want to think about the impact of a continued program like this on international relations.
Agreed. I think this whole scandal is really more about kicking Poindexter out of Defense than the merits of the terror market idea.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lhadatt
I just hope DARPA doesn't suffer or get killed outright because of this, because it's an important program. Besides, they gave us Metal Gear!
:lol:
DARPA isn't Poindexter. They were around when he was still climbing the military ranks.
They're the ones who invented Teh Intarweb, after all.
I am aware of that. But I understood DARPA had some involvement with this project.
They did, but as I understand it, this was another one of Poindexter's ideas.
Poindexter's ideas set the tone for DARPA -- the only problem is some of his ideas weren't that great or encompassed stuff they shouldn't have. Hopefully, someone with some common sense will step in and use the agency's creativity for better purposes.