Slashdot Mirror
Pentagon Lets You Bid on Terrorism?
Elysdir writes "DARPA is creating an idea futures market, the Policy Analysis Market, to try to predict events in the Middle East. See Bloomberg article for more info." Read this article. I mean it. This is amazing.
Update: 07/29 14:45 GMT by J : The
NYT story
claims "The White House also altered the Web site so that the potential events ... that were visible earlier in the day ... could no longer be seen," but those example images are still being served:
Jordanian overthrow,
bidding on assassinations,
cool graphics... Update: 07/29 16:44 GMT by M : Looks like the publicity was too much.
Ny Times article (free reg, stop whining) says it's not just for the Middle East. In any event, while I support innovative ways of fighting terrorism (as opposed to wiretapping everyone and giving the president imperium, etc) the idea of making money off of death is exceptionally disturbing.
Says this is another idea from Admiral John Poindexter of, most recently, Total Information Awareness fame. Sounds like he might be a sick sick man.
Karma: T-rexcellent.
Remember Jim Bell? Posted comments to the effect of setting up a system where you can bet on who will be assassinated. He got into deep trouble with the courts who tried to censor any mention of it. Here is some more information.
by John Brunner, in "The Shockwave Rider", based heavily in Alvin Tofler's "Future Shock".
The principle is called Delphi Polling. It is based on the observed fact that the aggregate answers of a large number of people sufficiently knowlegeable to understand a question seem, empirically, to be more accurate than the anwers of any one expert. Even though the answers of any one non-expert may be wildly out, the errors cancel out to a good approximation of the correct answer. Futurologists have been using it for a while to predict trends, and it works better than tea leaves, crystal balls and just plain "informed opinion" i.e. guesses. The USN even tried it with flying a plane, and it worked there too.
Consciousness is an illusion caused by an excess of self consciousness.
Given that the PAM only allows 1000 people a day to sign up, it'd take just under 3 years for even one million people to sign up. I don't think that the economic impact of the PAM will have any statistical significance. There's a really good piece on information markets on the New Yorker's website.
Here's DARPA's FutureMAP website which explains a little more about the idea than the article did. Note that this is a follow-up to a previous, similar program.
"Share your knowledge. It's a way to achieve immortality." -- Dalai Lama
You might want to read this New Yorker piece on the effectiveness of information markets.
The book Blind Man's Bluff also gives a detailed account of how the lost submarine USS Scorpion was located. All the experts could only narrow it down to a 20 mile radius. With no other options, they resorted to taking real money bets from other submarine commanders on the probabilities of different scenarios. Result? The submarine was found within a couple hundred yards from where they guessed.
Can you imagine some Navy officer going to his superiors at the Navy and explaining that we're going to try and find a submarine by having a betting pool on it? It sounds completely insane, and personally I can't believe anyone had the balls to suggest it. But it works. When people have a skin in the game, they tend to give their best, most honest appraisal. If it was up to me, I would require intelligence analyst types to participate in this kind of thing.
This is the science behind it
I really, really hope this is a joke...
Even senators thought this was a joke so you can be excused for thinking so. See the bold text from the rejected submission below - it's from the NY Times article.
Poindexter's Middle East Terror Bookie Scheme
2003-07-29 08:16:21 Poindexter's Middle East Terror Bookie Scheme The NY Times reports on DARPA's latest scheme: an options and futures trading market where you can bet on assassinations, toppling governments, instability and war in the Middle East (Google). The $8 million program is under the control of Admiral John Poindexter who brought us Total Information Awareness. The Policy Analysis Market starts taking registrants this week and betting/trading begins in October. Senator Byron L. Dorgan of North Dakota, said the idea seemed so preposterous that he had trouble persuading people it was not a hoax.
Why buy airline options *before* 9/11? The share prices for airlines fell after 9/11 if I am not mistaken which means that the price of options would have fallen after that date.
It is a *PUT* option. It is a promise to sell the buyer the stock at a given price on a given date. As the seller you are betting that the stock will be *lower* than the price you promised to sell at, the buyer is betting that it will be higher. If the stock plummets you make money.
As reported in Yahoo News The Pentagon has Abandoned its plan for the Terrorism Betting. My favorite quote from the story:
"The idea of a federal betting parlor on atrocities and terrorism is ridiculous and it's grotesque," said Sen. Ron Wyden D-Ore.
Looks like the images are gone/slashdotd/censored... so here's a mirror
Jordanian overthrow,
bidding on assassinations,
cool graphics...
--
What is the sound of this sentence?
Actually, it's the other way around:
If A sells B a put option on American Airlines with a strike price of $10, A is giving B the right to sell one share of AMR to A at $10.
If the stock goes down, say to $3, B can go into the open market, buy a share at $3, and then immediately sell it to A for $10, netting $7. (In reality, options aren't settled this way - A just pays B $7 directly, B doesn't have to buy the stock and then resell it).
In the scenario described above, B is betting that the stock will decline, while A is betting that it will stay stable or rise.
You described selling a call option, which is also a bet that the stock will go down. If A sells B a call on American at a $10 strike price, then A has sold B the right to _buy_ a share of American from A at $10. If the stock drops below $10, the option is worthless (B would be insane to buy a share from A at $10 if he can buy in the open market at $5). If the stock goes up to $15, then B can buy the share from A at $10, and sell it in the open market at $15, netting $5. In this case, A is betting that the stock will decline, while B is betting that it will rise.
The both buying a put and selling a call are bets that the stock will decline, the two have different risk profiles - if you buy a put, the most you can lose is whatever you paid for the option; if you write a call, your losses are technically unlimited (i.e. you sell a call at $10, and the stock goes to $1 million a share - you're on the hook for $999,990 per share).