If bets have an effect on the market, then sure, the subportfolio manager would find it useful to know how large the total portfolio is (to know how much capital is following the same strategy).
But it will still be maximizing its own log wealth IN THAT CONTEXT.
Conversation
ok fine how about your future earning potential?
that's not something you can turn into ETH easily but it is something which should be inside the log
1
or locked coins you have, or your house, or any number of other things that aren't ETH
1
Uh sure but have we resolved the math thing? Was I right about the math?
1
1
uh you were right that it depends on the assumptions you make, sorry about that!
in order for your actualy claim to be right you need to make batshit crazy assumptions
Quote Tweet
2
and the original thing you said that spawned this violates those assumptions you'd have to be making to justify your later claim
Quote Tweet
Replying to @SBF_FTX @SBF_Alameda and 3 others
Totally, it’s irrelevant. But given that you are managing this $1k as its own pot, might as well manage it well. If you robotically maximize EV for it, then it will get St. Petersburged and end up at 0 with very high probability
1
So, like, I think in the real world and also in the world that we had been talking about they're not independent, but you can construct other worlds where they are independent
1
1
I don't think assumptions 1 or 2 are necessary. Agree?
Quote Tweet
Replying to @danrobinson @SBF_Alameda and 3 others
Actually, I think this means we can drop the no-transfers assumption too. Because there will never be a need to rebalance between pots (because each pot is always equal in value). Optimal rebalancing is done within each pot.
2
And the other assumptions (to the extent I understand your assumption 4) were necessary already.
So, do we agree that if log-portfolio-wealth maximization is optimal for the full portfolio, log-pot-wealth-maximization is optimal if the portfolio is divided into pots?
2
what do you mean "were necessary already"? necessary for what?
2
like I think they're wrong and bad assumptions and should not be used in any models that are then quoted on twitter to justify shilling a real world product!