jwarden

6 ms·

31.
by jwarden 1y ago
Exactly.
32.
by jwarden 1y ago
The authors of the QF paper describe it as "an extension of the logic of quadratic voting." They involve similar formulas and both are theoretically optimal (or efficient), and have a single equilibrium. These properties are prove
33.
by jwarden 1y ago
Yes, as you (sarcastically) imply people do indeed try to use QF to make actual decisions, not recognizing the proofs are based on assumptions that don't match reality. There's nothing wrong with making proofs based on simplifying
34.
by jwarden 1y ago
What straw man? The assumptions underlying the theory of QF are spelled out cleanly in the original QF paper. The article is just enumerating these assumptions and showing they don't hold in reality. The numbers in the example are inde
35.
by jwarden 1y ago
> Do you have any evidence that these supposed assumptions exist? By existing, so you mean “hold in reality?” The point of the article is that the assumption that underly QF do not hold in reality .
36.
by jwarden 1y ago
> Pillaging these funds seems like it's almost a trivial endeavor assuming It is, and in fact the authors point this out in the original paper: "…if the size of this group is greater than 1/α and the group can perfectly co
37.
by jwarden 1y ago
> accepting the social and individual utility of enjoying the arts, but denying any such utility for enjoying the saved lives But in the part of the article you quoted above, the author (me) specifically acknowledges the utility of enjoy
38.
by jwarden 1y ago
QF makes assumptions like this, but it's not because the authors assume these assumptions reflect reality. They are just simplifying assumptions that allow formal proof of properties like optimality. Also this article is explicitly cha
39.
by jwarden 1y ago
> levels the playing field by a factor of 10 versus the starting point. Let's say there were only 10 poor people that contributed to the pipes. The total funding would be $10,000 -- a subsidy of $9,000. So 10x multiplier both for th
40.
by jwarden 1y ago
Well it's also unfair if we assume large difference in the marginal utility of wealth -- for example to go to extremes, we might assume that a $10 contribution from a low-income individuals represents the same sacrifice as a $1,000,000
41.
by jwarden 1y ago
Yes good point. We'd have to actually flesh out the assumptions about marginal utility of wealth for low-income vs. the high-income group (as well as assumptions about individual utility functions), to demonstrate that this outcome was
42.
by jwarden 1y ago
Oh right: (sqrt(.01) * 1000000)^2 = 1.0e10
43.
by jwarden 1y ago
great quote
44.
by jwarden 1y ago
Yep. QF basically assumes that subsidies are "free money", as discussed in the article: https://jonathanwarden.com/quadratic-funding-is-not-optimal/... In the original paper, the authors acknowledge this is a
45.
by jwarden 1y ago
In the example in the article, many more people did contribute to the lead pipes (100 people vs. 10 for the art museum). And they still get only a fraction of the funding that the art museum gets. Agree, coordination is a larger threat to
46.
by jwarden 1y ago
Total funding in this case would be: (sqrt(.01) * 1000000)^2 = 10 trillion dollars.
47.
by jwarden 1y ago
Here's a very brief summary of what Quadratic Funding is (which is distinct from Quadratic Voting): Quadratic Funding is a mechanism where individuals voluntarily contribute funds for some public good (e.g. an open source software proj
48.
Why quadratic funding is not optimal(jonathanwarden.com)
119 points by jwarden 1y ago|96 comments
49.
by jwarden 1y ago
I don’t use probability distributions in everyday life ;) But it is the right distribution to represent uncertainty about the probability of binary events (eg a website user clicking some button). For example, if I have absolutely no idea t
50.
by jwarden 1y ago
Brand counts for a lot
51.
by jwarden 1y ago
The way, I understand it is that with a Poisson process, at every small moment in time there’s a small chance of the event happening. This leads to on average lambda events occurring during every (larger) unit of time. But this process has
52.
by jwarden 1y ago
> What am I missing? Beta
53.
by jwarden 1y ago
I have never heard that book described as approachable.
54.
by jwarden 1y ago
Here's my own approach to explaining entropy as a measure of uncertainty: https://jonathanwarden.com/entropy-as-uncertainty
55.
by jwarden 2y ago
When politicians pick fights with leaders of other nations, the people don't have to go along with them.
56.
by jwarden 2y ago
I am surprised by this negative attitude towards HOAs. In my experience they have been absolutely necessary and helpful. I own a condo. The HOA maintains the exterior of the buildings, the shared driveway including snow removal, the landsca
57.
Who Should Control Social Media?(newpublic.substack.com)
4 points by jwarden 2y ago|0 comments
58.
by jwarden 2y ago
This article’s main point is that companies who do layoffs subsequently have poor financial performance relative to companies who don’t. Well obviously. It’s like saying surgery doesn’t work, because people who have recently undergone surge
59.
by jwarden 2y ago
It sounds like you are not considering rental income (the argument I made in my original comment). You only need growth of rental income to exceed growth of cost for it to be profitable to be a landlord. Am I incorrect?
60.
by jwarden 2y ago
Okay but I think we’ve lost the thread of the argument. I am arguing against the claim "Housing can be affordable or it can be a good investment. Not both." You support this claim with the argument that “If something goes up more

More ›