Okay, so we have a box with two halves that are distinguishable, and two indistinguishable particles moving "at random" in it. We expose them to extragalactic radio waves, until the surviving order is reflective of serial correlation in the radio signal, and thus predictable from moment to moment. To the extent this signal comes from "intelligent life," we have learned and recorded some possibly "useful" (to the end of self-perpetuation) information about the state of the universe.In other words, the outcome of supposedly "random" processes records information about the state of the universe. Suppose identical-twin gold prospectors set out with identical tools into two different canyons, and one comes back rich. We don't record which canyon the gold can be found in by writing it down in some central record book in Washington, by providing it to some great global administrator, or by re-informing God of it. Rather, the information is recorded only in the local sphere where it can be relavant.Similarly, if two inventors design web-sites, neither may have more merit, but rather we will learn something more about the universe by which one of them pleases more people, and becomes more wealthy (there is little to be done about what pleases people). But if we then tax and redistribute their wealth, so that they have the same decision-making power, and the same command of resources, what we have done is discarded information. Because topological survival and perpetuation is our only recording mechanism!So what socialist income redistribution succeeds in achieving - in the name of justice - is putting the particles at random spots in the box, so that it becomes indistinguishable whether there is intelligent life or not. In other words, the state will be the same whether gold was found in canyon A, or in canyon B. And the result of this is substitution of non-self-perpetuating structures for self-perpetuating ones - e.g. people starving in North Korea. In other words, socialism undermines the very manner in which we "know" things.Speaking on serial correlation, ever notice how every sexually deviant 26-year-old single girl fighting to survive in Manhattan looks up to Madonna (the female pop singer)? As a role model, Madonna has turned more victims of child abuse into sexual deviants and psychotic failures than any other conceivable influence - which seems to suggest that Jesus is much needed in American homes. I am thinking of starting a mission, perhaps it is not too late for some of the younger girls to be saved...Question: The US government is considering giving prescription drug coverage to seniors. What is the track record of people living very long - particularly frail, vulnerable people - who counted on a "generous" government to sustain them? What sort of horrible starvation and euthanasia is in store for the most vulnerable members of our community, if the government gains a monopoly in caring for them? What sort of a terrible beast will this seed grow into, I can only picture old people in living coffins of ooze like in The Matrix...MP

I have stated before how "a person is like plant." But so easy it is to be deceived, for with nearly the freedom of a bird does a man locomote about his environment!Such locomotion may have been relavant in days of savages, for a wanderer in search of food. But men in an era of trade, and the great catallaxy, move not in geographic circles but in social circles.And just as too many neurons cannot be interconnected by a single synapse, so too must a social network be limited. For it is the nature of all topologies to filter and sort.And so are men not created equal, but born like seeds, whether on barren hillsides or wet streambeds. Even though these features are metaphoric, since actual geographic features are a distraction.Those Wilmott posters who seek a job in Asia, or in New York, will find themselves no closer to Asia or New York after many hours in a plane ride. Better to reach those places by crawling up a social root right where they are.At the same time, however, a social system must be open, like an infant's brain. The great switching yard of universities shapes the same blind arrogance which arises naturally in certain circles.Yeah, so it's Sunday, what do you want? When the ticker stops, the mind wanders...MP

Some people can't take seeing trees cut down. I find the destruction of information so reckless and appalling that I just have to bring it up, in hopes of luring someone to weep with meAs many of you know, George Bush has proposed tax-rate cuts in the US. Democrats have objected that, since these rate cuts favor people who actually pay taxes, they are unfair to the poor.It is pretty bizarre to call transferring more resources from people who please people to be consumed by people who don't - in order to light a candle under the economic thermostat - a "tax cut."But what is sicker is the Democrat proposal to simply send an identical check for $300 to every US citizen with a heartbeat. I mean, why not just start giving money to jellyfish?It is quite a stark contrast, that what George Bush is proposing is a way for the economy to accumulate information, while the Democrats are proposing a way to destroy it, same as when they attack religion.Trees are just a bunch of soggy, moss-covered crap so far as I'm concerned. But wealth, and religion, these record the outcome of statistical trials, and should be guarded like the national treasury.MP

Must be Sunday...You know, I don't think there can be a more secure, stable job than that of tenured college professor. Which may mislead a lot of people who spend a lifetime "researching" it about the true nature of wealth and risk. Of course there is nothing riskier than life itself, where you may never be born, or where a piano may fall on your head. But beyond that I think the the so-called "risks" of financial enterprises - even though economies of scale may justify measuring their minutia to many decimal places - paint a false picture of economics.For one thing, a lot of people think there is much risk, layoffs, and feast-or-famine in the fast-paced world of financial services. But even being a professional poker player involves little risk compared to the common pursuit of farming over the last 1,000 years, crab-fishing today, owning a restaurant, or starting a record company. In fact, if any of you have ever been around show-business people, you will notice the income gap which Hollywood airheads rail against, is about 30 trillion to one. Most movie stars are weathered 40-year-old never-was girls living in trailers.Another thing I have noticed, is that money in the bank rarely is. As real statisticians are so quick to point out whenever politicians talk about "the rich," people are moving in and out of the top income bracket at a ridiculous pace, most of those in the bottom fifth in 1978 were in the top fifth sometime since, and the only real guarantee of financial security seems to be gray hair impotence and osteoporosis. My father the architect warns that there are two kinds of real-estate developers, those who have gone bankrupt, and those who haven't yet gone bankrupt but will.The bottom line being, that people who stumble onto something that works and strike it rich, do not suddenly fly off to Hawaii and relax for a decade, or blow all their money on five Mercedes Benz's. More often than not, they plough most of their money back into what works, and keep doubling up until suddenly they are broke again when it stops working. Like stopped clocks which are accurate twice a day, politicians actually admit this when they advocate putting money into the hands of the poor, who have a higher propensity to consume rather than invest.I would argue that economic evolution takes places at a far more vicious pace not just than utopian communists imagined, but even faster than most capitalist can picture. The rise and fall of a species, whether it be a certain activity or enterprise, from the pinnacle of the economic universe to oblivion, can happen in a matter of months. And nor do I think this is a bad thing, but rather represents the ideal of capitalism in its natural state, and at its peak efficiency. I see it like the carcass of a fallen forest animal being consumed by microbes in eleven seconds.So what we essentially have is a giant neural network, with a particular learning frequency. The faster the frequency at which it can learn - the faster fortunes can rise or fall - the shorter the correlated streams of economic needs and events which can be exploited as trends. The faster a particular enterprise can rise, the more it can exploit an opportunity - meaning the more people it can feed and cloth and house and distract - in the middle, meaning when it still works. If you reduce the learning frequency by only half, the height of that peak may be reduced by 90%.And what this constant siphoning off of the rich achieves, through quarterly filing and withholding and a mountain of other compliance, is deadening that growth-and-decay-rate, and reducing the height of production at the sweet spot substantially. I would argue that if US government diverting of resources shrunk by half as a percentage of GDP, the economy could grow and satisfy people not just at twice the rate, but at perhaps five or six or seven times the rate. People who make a little money, should be freed to go absolutely nuts for their brief shining moment.Who doubts that if I kept all the money I made trading, that I wouldn't spend every penny of it buying computers, hiring programmers and, ultimately, instructing farmers accurately as to whether people are in need of more grain or pulp this month?MP