Finally, we need to know if this was only possible, because it was a fairly simple experimental model. Will the same decision-maker’s ability exist in extremely complex public policy markets?
Meta
-
Recent Posts
- Native apps are reigning on mobiles, but Jakob Nielsen strategically bets on web apps. — [LINK]
- Steven Krivit continues to trash Andrea Rossi and his LENR technology. — [LINK]
- Interview with Adam Lashinsky — [VIDEO]
- Why some people are more innovative — [VIDEO]
- Forbes editor deciphers Steve Jobs’s Apple. — [VIDEO]
- Jason Ruspini rebuts Eric Zitzewitz on the regulation of political prediction markets. — [COMMENT]
- Eric Zitzewitz petitions the CFTC in favor of real-money prediction markets about politics. — [TEXT]
- Global warming is a big scam. — [LINK]
- A Swarm of Nano Quadrotors — [VIDEO]
- The Tragedy of the Commons — [VIDEO]
- Guy Kawasaki on Steve Jobs — [VIDEO]
- Inside Apple — [VIDEO]
- Mitt Romney’s taxes — [LINKS]
- A critique of Apple’s multimedia iBooks. — [LINK]
- Does Apple lack “generosity”? — [LINKS]
- Apple Education Push — [LINKS]
- Water Crystals — [DOCUMENT]
- Apple’s e-book software will allow publishers to make textbooks more interactive. — [LINKS + VIDEO]
- Alain Soral is France’s most dangerous intellectual… (dangerous for the French plutocrats, that is). — [VIDEO]
- Computers thru time — [CHART]
Here’s the third of four posts involving a review of Robin’s papers.
http://torontopm.wordpress.com/2009/11/27/traders-do-need-to-know-the-direction-of-manipulation/
On my blog, Robin commented that traders did not need to know the direction in which manipulators were trying to move the market, yet in his own paper he concluded that they did need to know the direction. Apart from that, while it was a simple, laboratory experiment, it did show that non-manipulative traders were able to counteract the effects of the manipulators, by changing their threshold for accepting higher bids.