Monthly Archives: June 2012


…It was so obvious that Shaiy summarized it in the same breath. He actually believes that all real ideas can be distilled down to a central issue that the majority of people in a field, by dint of specialization and emptysuitedness, completely miss. Everything in religion come down to applications and interpretations of “don’t do unto others what you don’t want them to do to you.” And this was a true distillation, not a Procrustean bed.
Shaiys’s summary was: fragility is what loses from volatility. Everything in life gains or loses from volatility. The glass on the table is short volatility.
I calmly looked at the manuscript with the feeling of calm elation. Every sentence in the book was an application of the short maxim…

via CONCLUSION As… | Facebook.



Why Is Fragility in the NonlinearI- There have been works on the link between risk and nonlinearity initially by Arrow and Pratt, then followed by a collection of authors such as Rothchild, Stiglitz, Machina, and others. These fellows were not option traders; their work was mistakenly focused on nonlinearity of preferences which they got wrong since preferences are not concave, but convex-concave & path dependent as shown by Kahneman & Tversky. What they missed is that the nonlinearity of probability of events automatically causes nonlinearity in survival, hence concavity of harm…

via NOTEBOOK OPACITY,… | Facebook.

DE INCERTO Friends, now looking again for a title…


Friends, now looking again for a title, as I am fusing all my books in a single opus (1,AF;3,FBR; 4,TBS;5,BoP) under the principle that the chapters in a given volume should relate to another in another volume as if they were part of the same book. And the collection could be accessed in any order, except for the 2nd volume after AF.


In the end, I want to write/have written one large book.

via DE INCERTO Friends,… | Facebook.


Second principle of iatrogenics: it is not linear. I do not believe that we should take risks with near-healthy people; I also believe that we should take a lot, a lot more risks with those deemed in danger.

Why do we need to focus treatment on more serious cases, not marginal ones? Take this example showing nonlinearity. When hypertension is mild, say marginally higher than the zone accepted as “normotensive”, the chance of benefiting from the drug is close to 5.6% only one person in eighteen benefit from the treatment. But when tension is considered to be in the “high” or “severe” categories, the chance of benefiting are now 26% and 72%, respectively that is that one person in four and two persons out of 3 will benefit from the treatment. So the treatment benefits are convex to condition the benefits rise disproportionally, in an accelerated manner. But consider that the iatrogenics should be near-constant for all categories! In the very ill condition, the benefits are large relative to iatrogenics, in the borderline one, they are small. This means that we need to focus on high symptom conditions and ignore, I mean really ignore, other situations in which the patient is not very ill…

via NONLINEARITY OF… | Facebook.