3 ms·
Because the markets are rational, all-knowing, and have never been wrong?
by willsmith72 2y ago
Because the markets are rational, all-knowing, and have never been wrong?
- huijzer 2y agoThat was not the question.
- mcv 2y agoIt is if you're using market movements as evidence of anything factual. If markets aren't rational, you can't use them that way.
- whimsicalism 2y agodo you only take advice/learn from all-knowing people?
- mcv 2y agoDo you know any? But here's my advice: drop the fallacious arguments and try something more honest.
- whimsicalism 2y agomy argument isn’t fallacious - it is logical: we can learn/use evidence from something without presuming it is all knowing. you are putting words in others mouths that they did not say
- mcv 2y agoI'm sorry, I thought you introduced the "all-knowing" out of nowhere, but this was indeed mentioned by willsmith72. I'd missed that. Still, his implied assertion that markets that markets can often behave irrationally, and can't be used as evidence of technical matters, seems pretty valid to me. But I suppose you could see it as a sign that something is at least temporarily "generally accepted" among investors. That doesn't mean it's generally accepted among AI researchers, though. Although I thought it was $6M rather than $5M, and that that was only the last step, and not the total investment. What does seem to be generally accepted among investors that this isn't good news for NVidia's profits, but that still doesn't mean that all the specific facts are generally accepted.
- tucnak 2y agoDon't worry, NVDA will bounce back and you will get a chance to get out. Efficient market hypothesis is for nerds!
- pgwhalen 2y agoNo, because the market is an aggregate of opinions, so it’s entirely fair to say it’s “generally accepted.” That has nothing to do with whether something happens to be true or not. It may provide a financial opportunity for someone who disagrees with that aggregated opinion though.
- ahmeneeroe-v2 2y agoas opposed to HN comments??