Assorted links

Comments

Twitter doesn't offer anything the web doesn't offer in dozens of other places. It's just a proprietary blogging platform with a 140 character limit. Instapundit is usually less than 140 characters, but I don't need to go to a proprietary page to read it. I can read it in any RSS Reader (I prefer Google Reader, but obviously the choice is yours).

Also, the idea of a "social" filter is useless. I'm not personal friends with Tyler or Alex, so I'm not friends with them on Facebook, but I like their links and opinions on economics. Using your social graph to find news and opinions is a GREAT way to lock yourself in a Kaelian bubble while simultaneously closing yourself off from world experts.

And Twitter will never kill RSS, because I get the full post in my Reader.

The only reason Twitter took off was because it was the first system to go to "real time." Facebook was slow, and RSS was slower yet. But that advantage is gone - Facebook is real time, and with RSSCloud and PubSubHubbub protocols so is RSS. So the disaggregation will beat the platform (as always), in the same way "the web" beat AOL and CompuServe. No one company (not even Google) can ever match the scale, variety and robustness of the Internet at large.

"For whatever we do, even whatever we do not do prevents us from doing its opposite. Acts demolish their alternatives, that is the paradox."

I don't see a word that substitutes for 'dogma' in this axiom. Why not? Perhaps the author will be less uncomfortable with this paradox as he relaxes his dogmata.

The first link, boundary control in economics and physics, refers to economics as a highly regarded field.

No, really, click on it and read the last paragraph. I'm not joking.

No, no, listen, it was written after 2008! Yes, 8! In fact, it was written just yesterday!

No, you're thinking of 6.5 months ago; today nobody's trying to play an elaborate joke on you.

Falling dollar actually has two failings.
1) Makes savings in dollar denominated assets less valuable, this means that fewer people save. This means banks have a smaller pool with which to draw funds for loans from.
2) Because of the money illusion it makes stock options more valuable because companies can dilute socks slowly without the value of the share dropping. In an inflationary environment the stock value should rise, and many would see that as rising value, and buy... /BUT/ companies can keep their share price steady while diluting value.

I don't know currencies from Adam's cat, so if you have better comments go ahead and complain about mine, but I've never liked the falling dollar idea. Why do we want our exports to be more competitive? What we should want is comparative advantage. Changing currency value is a bad thing because it forces a recalculation in what might have been a good mix of division of labor and trade.

isnt the patriotic thing to do to buy goods made in america and not in china?

i dont get it-- circulating money within your own country's economy is a good thing right? when other countries see that property and equity in america is cheap, doesnt that mean foreign money is being transferred into american pockets? and if money goes from other countries, to our pockets, that makes us better off right?

Comments for this post are closed