4 ms·

I don't really see how "it doesn't serve any socially useful function" yields the statement "it should be outlawed." The former applies to many, many things tha

by wjn0 9y ago

I don't really see how "it doesn't serve any socially useful function" yields the statement "it should be outlawed." The former applies to many, many things that are still legal. Disappointing to hear such weak reasoning from someone who is lauded as one of the greatest minds of our time. I can't watch the video, so perhaps that particular statement lacks some context.

1337biz 9y ago
But isn't that level of ideological punditry what Stiglitz's is today all about?
- labster 9y ago
  Ideological punditry doesn't serve a useful purpose, so it should be outlawed.
- kelvin0 9y ago
  Is he like the Ann Coulter of Economics/Finance? Genuine question.
  - 1337biz 9y ago
    I don't even hold it against him. He probably just realized that he can have a much more entertaining life (more speeches, more books sold, etc) by being more provocative and telling the New Yorker readers how wholesome their views are. I would myself certainly prefer that over a life spend between teaching Undergrads another decade the same models and fumble with statistics long enough to write another paper that explains the world.
  - abiox 9y ago
    what does it mean to be "the ann coulter of economics"? do you mean having a propensity to make inflammatory comments? (wikipedia claims he supports the british Labour Party, so i'd wager their politics are quite different.)
  - thehardsphere 9y ago
    I wouldn't go that far, though it's sort of a flawed analogy for comparison. Economics generally is a field where lots of people hold on to their prior beliefs, and those beliefs are difficult to change, even in the face of new evidence and data. Even though most economists agree with each other about the basic sort of stuff that you learn in undergraduate classes, there's lots of disagreement when it comes to broader, value-judgement type questions. There's also a lot of disagreement about what data means that is difficult to resolve with more studies, and studies are hard because we can't do double-blind control trials of macroeconomic policy. So, it's not necessarily unusual for economists to express crackpot-sounding opinions on matters of public interest without actually being crackpots within their field. Stiglitz has some weird ideas (I seem to remember he suggested the government should pay people to dig ditches and fill them back in to get out of the recession), and they may even be wrong (I myself don't really agree with him), but he's not a guy who just says stuff out of nowhere to provoke people like Ann Coulter.
ntaylor 9y ago
His argument seems willfully ignorant, at best.
CalChris 9y ago
When Stieglitz said: it doesn't serve any socially useful function he was saying that in relation to: bitcoin is successful only because of its potential for circumvention, lack of oversight So what he's really saying is that circumvention and lack of oversight are not socially useful functions. I'm no fan of bitcoin and I'm a huge Stieglitz fan but I'm going to disagree with him there. Privacy (lack of oversight) is a socially useful function. However, bitcoin only gives the appearance of privacy while giving the reality of lack of oversight.
- baby 9y ago
  Please don’t use codeblocks for quotes. Can’t read them on mobile.
  - wslh 9y ago
    They scroll on mobile devices... just swipe your finger.
    - thomastjeffery 9y ago
      Which is difficult, and in no way preferable to having them already word-wrapped.
ekianjo 9y ago
> who is lauded as one of the greatest minds of our time. Says who, really? A lot of Economics Nobel Prize Winners have been chosen because of their "compatibility" with modern politics, not for the merit of their work.
- kiliantics 9y ago
  The economics prize wasn't even one of the orginal prizes that Nobel created. It was almost definitely invented to justify Western political ideology. I believe the other prizes largely serve a similar purpose these days too, just think of that Obama peace prize.
  - jcranmer 9y ago
    Please explain to me how the 2017 Nobel Prize for "developing cryo-electron microscopy for the high-resolution structure determination of biomolecules in solution" is meant to "justify Western political ideology." Or maybe the one for "decisive contributions to the LIGO detector and the observation of gravitational waves is easier." Or maybe "their discoveries of molecular mechanisms controlling the circadian rhythm."
    - kiliantics 9y ago
      Hard sciences are not without politicisation either. Just look at this wiki entry: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobel_Prize_controversies#Physics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobel_Prize_controversies#Phys... There's definitely a trend of scientists from e.g. Russia claiming to have been the originators of ideas that others got prizes for. Academia in general tends to be very Western-centric and so these kinds of issues - and all the other problems with Western cultural hegemony (patriarchy, racism etc.) - are pervasive in all facets of it.
      - Retra 9y ago
        Right, because non-western society has no racism or patriarchy. It's all just enlightenment and peace in the east.
jdauriemma 9y ago
It's unfortunate that Stiglitz made such a lazy proclamation. First of all, BTC can be used with sufficient anonymity as to frustrate any meaningful enforcement mechanisms. But if we stipulate the notion of a successful prohibition of BTC, what about all the other cryptocurrencies out there? Should we ban them, too? If so, it seems to me that we'd have to ban most of technologies that underpin the modern internet.

by wjn0 9y ago

1337biz 9y ago

But isn't that level of ideological punditry what Stiglitz's is today all about?

labster 9y ago
Ideological punditry doesn't serve a useful purpose, so it should be outlawed.
kelvin0 9y ago
Is he like the Ann Coulter of Economics/Finance? Genuine question.
- 1337biz 9y ago
  I don't even hold it against him. He probably just realized that he can have a much more entertaining life (more speeches, more books sold, etc) by being more provocative and telling the New Yorker readers how wholesome their views are. I would myself certainly prefer that over a life spend between teaching Undergrads another decade the same models and fumble with statistics long enough to write another paper that explains the world.
- abiox 9y ago
  what does it mean to be "the ann coulter of economics"? do you mean having a propensity to make inflammatory comments? (wikipedia claims he supports the british Labour Party, so i'd wager their politics are quite different.)
- thehardsphere 9y ago
  I wouldn't go that far, though it's sort of a flawed analogy for comparison. Economics generally is a field where lots of people hold on to their prior beliefs, and those beliefs are difficult to change, even in the face of new evidence and data. Even though most economists agree with each other about the basic sort of stuff that you learn in undergraduate classes, there's lots of disagreement when it comes to broader, value-judgement type questions. There's also a lot of disagreement about what data means that is difficult to resolve with more studies, and studies are hard because we can't do double-blind control trials of macroeconomic policy. So, it's not necessarily unusual for economists to express crackpot-sounding opinions on matters of public interest without actually being crackpots within their field. Stiglitz has some weird ideas (I seem to remember he suggested the government should pay people to dig ditches and fill them back in to get out of the recession), and they may even be wrong (I myself don't really agree with him), but he's not a guy who just says stuff out of nowhere to provoke people like Ann Coulter.

ntaylor 9y ago

His argument seems willfully ignorant, at best.

CalChris 9y ago

When Stieglitz said: it doesn't serve any socially useful function he was saying that in relation to: bitcoin is successful only because of its potential for circumvention, lack of oversight So what he's really saying is that circumvention and lack of oversight are not socially useful functions. I'm no fan of bitcoin and I'm a huge Stieglitz fan but I'm going to disagree with him there. Privacy (lack of oversight) is a socially useful function. However, bitcoin only gives the appearance of privacy while giving the reality of lack of oversight.

baby 9y ago
Please don’t use codeblocks for quotes. Can’t read them on mobile.
- wslh 9y ago
  They scroll on mobile devices... just swipe your finger.
  - thomastjeffery 9y ago
    Which is difficult, and in no way preferable to having them already word-wrapped.

ekianjo 9y ago

> who is lauded as one of the greatest minds of our time. Says who, really? A lot of Economics Nobel Prize Winners have been chosen because of their "compatibility" with modern politics, not for the merit of their work.

kiliantics 9y ago
The economics prize wasn't even one of the orginal prizes that Nobel created. It was almost definitely invented to justify Western political ideology. I believe the other prizes largely serve a similar purpose these days too, just think of that Obama peace prize.
- jcranmer 9y ago
  Please explain to me how the 2017 Nobel Prize for "developing cryo-electron microscopy for the high-resolution structure determination of biomolecules in solution" is meant to "justify Western political ideology." Or maybe the one for "decisive contributions to the LIGO detector and the observation of gravitational waves is easier." Or maybe "their discoveries of molecular mechanisms controlling the circadian rhythm."
  - kiliantics 9y ago
    Hard sciences are not without politicisation either. Just look at this wiki entry: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobel_Prize_controversies#Physics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobel_Prize_controversies#Phys... There's definitely a trend of scientists from e.g. Russia claiming to have been the originators of ideas that others got prizes for. Academia in general tends to be very Western-centric and so these kinds of issues - and all the other problems with Western cultural hegemony (patriarchy, racism etc.) - are pervasive in all facets of it.
    - Retra 9y ago
      Right, because non-western society has no racism or patriarchy. It's all just enlightenment and peace in the east.

jdauriemma 9y ago

It's unfortunate that Stiglitz made such a lazy proclamation. First of all, BTC can be used with sufficient anonymity as to frustrate any meaningful enforcement mechanisms. But if we stipulate the notion of a successful prohibition of BTC, what about all the other cryptocurrencies out there? Should we ban them, too? If so, it seems to me that we'd have to ban most of technologies that underpin the modern internet.