Stuart_Armstrong comments on Crash problems for total futarchy - Less Wrong

6 Post author: Stuart_Armstrong 15 May 2013 10:41AM

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

Comments (16)

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

Comment author: Stuart_Armstrong 16 May 2013 08:40:03AM 1 point [-]

I question whether it's wise to make new rules during a financial crisis.

But unstable betting markets may be shouting out for new rules in a crisis. We don't know in what direction the betting markets will be compromised.

I'm also less convinced that we can plan, ahead of time, for the best ways of getting through all crises that affect the financial markets. Stupid example: a foreign attack triggers a stockmarket sell off. Doing nothing is not the correct thing to do - but what is? What if it's a misfired nuke from a future somewhat-reformed and apologising North Korea - now complicated decision have to be taken, highly dependent on the exact situation. We can't plan for these situations, so if we can't use the betting markets reliably, we need to preserve some other decision making skills.

Comment author: pcm 16 May 2013 07:11:13PM 0 points [-]

I envision markets generating rules, but not making all decisions. I don't see any indication that futarchy would take much discretion away from the people who currently make military decisions.

Comment author: Stuart_Armstrong 16 May 2013 10:19:42PM 1 point [-]

If we can maintain that kind of balance between the deciders and the betting markets, things should be fine. The problem would be if the betting markets become dominant in decision making (and choosing how to respond to a seemingly accidental firing is a political, not a military decision).