I’m pretty capitalist, but the idea that markets are the smartest large-scale entities we’ll ever invent is deeply depressing. This is why I’m always intrigued by *interesting* distortions. Not tawdry cronyist power grabs, but other kinds of weird unplanned distortions.
Conversation
Analogous to why the thought that some massive gradient-descent based algorithm is going to be the best kind of AI we might ever invent 🤬😬🤢🤮😖
5
3
25
Interesting distortions include: reason (eg planning), urgent temporal forcing functions (climate change), low liquidity regimes and “art” pricing, ‘economics of pricelessness’, bureaucracy (= human GOFAI), smart contracts, HFT, exotic securitized instruments...
2
2
33
Problem with all these distortion ideas is that they are almost always easier to hack than use as intended. Cf the Lebowski theorem
Quote Tweet
The Lebowski theorem: No superintelligent AI is going to bother with a task that is harder than hacking its reward function
Show this thread
Replying to
Still, out of every 100 ideas to do better than today’s market, if 99 are easier to hack than use, 1 is a genuine advance within or outside the ‘market’ paradigm.
So I like the idea of an eternal arms race between markets and imaginative attempts to distort them.
1
2
15
You’ll always end up with one of 3 things:
A new kind of criminal (99%)
A new kind of market (0.9%)
Something smarter than a market (0.1%)
1
1
28
Dumb view: both markets and distortions are eternal patterns.
Free-market fundamentalist view: markets evolve, distortions don’t
Reactionary view (both left and right): markets are static but my new kind of distortion will deliver utopia
Ze Truth: Arms race. Both evolve.
4
2
32

