Now THIS is a true waste of tax payer dollars
- Thread starter Natoma
- Start date
- Status
Joe DeFuria
Legend
Nice of you to cut that last quote short:
And the point remains that it's still been funded by our tax dollars.
Where's your outrage Joe. Let's see that manly sneer and veneer that you've expressed so strongly for the Harvey Milk School that has received public funding for the 2003 fiscal year.
C'mon al-qaeda! bomb that city! mamma needs a new pair of shoes!
You will spit so much venom out toward those kids, yet nothing for these guys who engage in this type of betting? Man. Talk about needing some priorities.
Where's your outrage Joe. Let's see that manly sneer and veneer that you've expressed so strongly for the Harvey Milk School that has received public funding for the 2003 fiscal year.
C'mon al-qaeda! bomb that city! mamma needs a new pair of shoes!
You will spit so much venom out toward those kids, yet nothing for these guys who engage in this type of betting? Man. Talk about needing some priorities.
Fuck you.
I'm at lunch, and here you are berating me for not berating this stupid idea.
Beyond that, I'm not obliged to share my opinions on anything, regardless of how much you want me to.
Once again, fuck you.
But, to answer your question, I haven't read much on it, but it seems mighty silly to me. Maybe there's more to it than what is presented in that article, but on the surface it does seem like betting on terrorist attacks. (Thouh, truthfully, thats exactly what insurance is)
I'm at lunch, and here you are berating me for not berating this stupid idea.
Beyond that, I'm not obliged to share my opinions on anything, regardless of how much you want me to.
Once again, fuck you.
But, to answer your question, I haven't read much on it, but it seems mighty silly to me. Maybe there's more to it than what is presented in that article, but on the surface it does seem like betting on terrorist attacks. (Thouh, truthfully, thats exactly what insurance is)
I figured the news media and the average person is incapable of understanding this. Similar systems have been used to predict the outcome of elections (Iowa Political Stock Market), and there is a fine tradition of using futures markets to aggregate knowledge. This is an area of theoretical research and not a "stupid idea"
The idea that terrorists would try to make a lot of money off this is ludicrous since contracts are typically limited to a small fixed priced.
DARPA is researching this, because the IPSM/IEM has been surprisingly accurate in its predictions of elections (vs opinion polls). The actual amount of money spent would be surprisingly small (IPSM ran with $5-$500 bids on a University department budget) and most of the costs are just running the site.
If DARPA doesn't do this, I guarantee someone else will set it up.
And if terrorists start playing the market, then they are "inside traders", which are a good thing, because they will tell us where they are going next.
The idea that terrorists would try to make a lot of money off this is ludicrous since contracts are typically limited to a small fixed priced.
DARPA is researching this, because the IPSM/IEM has been surprisingly accurate in its predictions of elections (vs opinion polls). The actual amount of money spent would be surprisingly small (IPSM ran with $5-$500 bids on a University department budget) and most of the costs are just running the site.
If DARPA doesn't do this, I guarantee someone else will set it up.
And if terrorists start playing the market, then they are "inside traders", which are a good thing, because they will tell us where they are going next.
Well, actually, I have been away from my office for about 2 hours.Natoma said:
But next time I'll make sure to check back just in case I don't respond to your beck and call quick enough.
DemoCoder said:
Indeed, you can see a good thing for this, as can I. But that still doesn't change the fact that, imo, it can also be seen as an awful betting scheme. Almost like wishing for disaster to occur so your stock pick (in this case, betting which terrorist event will occur and where) will appreciate in value (money does exchange hands here).
I'm just wondering where the outrage is. This is a life and death situation (sort of). Additional funding for a private institution meant to help gay kids is most certainly not.
Natoma said:
I basically support anything DARPA does as their a group of utterly brilliant individuals whose ideas are often beyond most people (eg. you).
As per the "udicrousness of the funding" - which amounts to several hundred thousand dollars total, is nothing. It's a pilot research project and deserves to be followed up as such - worst case it fails and we "lose" the ~$100,000 in funding, but if it works then it was well worth it. At the least it should be followed up.
Unfortunatly, we have retards like Barbara Boxer saying,"There is something very sick about this." The truth is she probobly has no idea the goals of the project and is just towing the partisan political line.
I think we can all agree that the day politics inhibits science is a very bad day indeed.
http://www.darpa.mil/iao/FutureMap.htm
Yeah, but just because a scheme is on a distasteful subject (terrorist attack) doesn't negate any positive benefit it could have for saving lives.
DARPA could equally do a "honeypot" scheme like they do for computer hackers. Setup a phony site for a terrorist attack, use informants to spread to the terrorist network that this site is "soft" but "highly valuable" and then wait for them to attack and apprehend them.
It is unlikely that terrorists will use this market to make money since they can make far more money playing the real stock market. For example, short Southwest, then arrange for an attack on Southwest, or short an insurance company, then stage a major attack that will bleed it dry.
It is more likely that it could drive millions of regular people to do "freelance counterterrorism" sitting around doing research and analysis, adding to the ranks of the CIA but without hiring them, and using "open sources" only. All to try and win a few hundred bucks.
I don't know about you, but if we're going to have a lottery, let's have one that actually could produce some results and depends on skill and intelligence, instead of one that just takes money from poor people and funnels the result into government waste.
DARPA could equally do a "honeypot" scheme like they do for computer hackers. Setup a phony site for a terrorist attack, use informants to spread to the terrorist network that this site is "soft" but "highly valuable" and then wait for them to attack and apprehend them.
It is unlikely that terrorists will use this market to make money since they can make far more money playing the real stock market. For example, short Southwest, then arrange for an attack on Southwest, or short an insurance company, then stage a major attack that will bleed it dry.
It is more likely that it could drive millions of regular people to do "freelance counterterrorism" sitting around doing research and analysis, adding to the ranks of the CIA but without hiring them, and using "open sources" only. All to try and win a few hundred bucks.
I don't know about you, but if we're going to have a lottery, let's have one that actually could produce some results and depends on skill and intelligence, instead of one that just takes money from poor people and funnels the result into government waste.
Natoma said:
There's no outrage because unlike allowing a bunch of homosexuals to have their own private circle-jerk at the taxpayers expense, nation defense is everyones concern and need.
See Natoma, projects like this that emerge from DARPA are the programs that are low cost and high yeild. Even if the ~$100,000 investment by DARPA was totally wasted, we still would have found something beneficial out of it and the methodology that will be reused in the Defense Establishment.
Just a bit different than the taxpayer paying for a bunch of gay kids to have their own private school while their own [strait] kids are in the general state tract and getting picked on day-in and day-out with no special interest representing them. If they want to get their child out of this situation then they must do what everyone else does - pay for their kid to attend a private school out of pocket.
Damn best sentence the whole thread.
Next thing you know there will be schools for overweight kids, children who get picked on because they have red hair, children who get picked on because they are short.
There is a fine line, and a school just for gay children just crosses it. I'm gonna laugh if straight kids demand their own school.
DemoCoder said:
I agree.
And despite protestations to the contrary, Harvey Milk provides a definitive positive benefit for the students that attend, i.e. an environment in which they won't have to fear getting their heads bashed in for simply existing. The school most certainly saves lives.
This forum doesn't mean all the netiquette rules can just be chucked out the window. Sheesh.
- Status