Daniel_Burfoot comments on (Virtual) Employment Open Thread - Less Wrong

35 Post author: Will_Newsome 23 September 2010 04:25AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (276)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Daniel_Burfoot 24 September 2010 03:27:06PM 9 points [-]

(In practice, except possibly for heads-up limit hold'em, good players are still better than the best bots published in the academic literature anyway.)

This is an interesting observation, but probably not that surprising: if you had a superior poker bot that was consistently profitable, why on earth would you publish it?

Generalizing, if someone working at a bank or hedge fund developed a superior theory of economics, and that theory could be used to make money through trading, why would they tell anyone else about it? Once the knowledge became public, it would no longer be profitable.

Comment author: feanor1600 25 September 2010 03:42:25AM 4 points [-]

This is the evil corollary of the Efficient Markets Hypothesis (that all publicly available information is instantly incorporated into market prices).

Comment author: dares 02 April 2011 08:08:40PM *  0 points [-]

This made me think of a sports gambling database and strategy set that I read about in an ESPN magazine at a barber shop. I don't remember the specifics but I recall that the database was shared by invitation only and had an intentional "barrier to entry" level buy in, which seemed high to me. The article claimed the database was in use by only 9 professional gamblers. I'd like to see some performance data on their bets.