You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

chaosmage comments on Contrarian LW views and their economic implications - Less Wrong Discussion

16 Post author: Larks 08 October 2014 11:48PM

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

Comments (126)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: chaosmage 09 October 2014 01:04:02PM *  16 points [-]

These feel like stating the obvious, but maybe outside LW they wouldn't:

  • Expect the judgement of evidently rational players (such as Peter Thiel, Elon Musk, and probably many others I'm unaware of) to be extra trustworthy. Do what they're suggesting, or what becomes profitable once their suggestions have been implemented by others. (For example, Elon Musk said fully electric hypersonic VTOL jets are possible. He's rational and knows a lot about electric propulsion and aerospace, so this heuristic means believe him even though he hasn't demonstrated it. So when looking at aircraft propulsion business, favor companies at least looking at electric propulsion.)
  • Expect economic upheaval created by self-driving cars and other autonomous drones in the next ten years. Avoid investing in any business insufficiently aware of, or insufficiently preparing for, that. Specifically, avoid brick-and-mortar retail with (narrow ranges of) products that could be shipped via drones.
  • Expect the education bubble to burst at some point. Avoid investing in business that would suffer in that case (e.g. real estate near universities), and invest in companies that benefit from it (e.g. online education providers).

Maybe if you make a detailed scenario study of a world where all of these are true, you can find more indirect opportunities. All those drones should create a booming market for ultra-low power radar devices, for example. But that's hardly an LW specific idea. I think rationality mostly helps you reduce uncertainty about probabilities, but not necessarily into any particular direction. I suspect its main value might be that with greater certainty about how things that haven't happened yet will eventually turn out, you can more confidently think another step ahead and take opportunities that other people aren't sure will even arise.

Comment author: Daniel_Burfoot 09 October 2014 08:45:45PM 9 points [-]

Expect the education bubble to burst at some point.

Personally, I expect this "market" to remain irrational for longer than I expect anyone who bets against it to remain solvent.

Comment author: Lumifer 09 October 2014 08:56:48PM 6 points [-]

It's hard to short universities :-)

I expect the market to bifurcate with the top tier maintaining its ability to commandeer outrageous prices, but the bottom tier either reinventing itself or going bust. Harvard is fine, a fifth-tier law school in South Dakota is in deep trouble.

Comment author: Larks 11 October 2014 09:56:13PM 2 points [-]

You can short this one.

Comment author: [deleted] 12 October 2014 09:33:22AM 1 point [-]

My first reaction on looking at the plot on the right, before reading the labels on the x axis, was ‘it looks like the impending doom is probably already priced in’.

Comment author: Larks 10 October 2014 12:59:10AM 5 points [-]

These are very good suggestions; thank you for making them.

Expect the education bubble to burst at some point.

Is this a LW consensus? I know Thiel believes it, but if you follow a Caplan-style signalling model it's not clear we won't end up in a Peacock like race for more and more education.

Comment author: ChristianKl 10 October 2014 10:58:35AM 3 points [-]

Is this a LW consensus?

There very little real consensus on LW. On most subject you do have a few people who are contrarian on LW. On the other hand many people on LW think that's the case.