The Black Swan Problem

[Jeremiah Dyke]

Would you offer your thoughts on this quote from Nassim Taleb.

"We will see that, contrary to social-science wisdom, almost no discovery, no technologies of note, came from design and planning - they were just Black Swans. The strategy for the discoverers and entrepreneurs is to rely less on top-down planning and focus on maximum tinkering and recognizing opportunities when they present themselves. So I disagree with the followers of Marx and those of Adam Smith: the reason free markets work is because they allow people to be lucky, thanks to aggressive trial and error, not by giving rewards or "incentives" for skill. The strategy is, then, to tinker as much as possible and try to collect as many Black Swan opportunities as you can."

[#FF0000]

This doesn't sound like anything new or groundbreaking, nor does it sound like anything that would be at odds with Socialism.

Nobody thinks that one discovers anything through design and planning and things going smoothly. Discovery or creating something new is definitely all about aggressive trial and error, but nobody on the planet says otherwise.

I want to know what "social-science wisdom" this guy is talking about, because nothing he's said here sounds new to me at all.

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

The problem is that under capitalism these 'black swans' allow some to become fabulously rich and thus command the labour of others -- only then to form monopolies, which deny as many 'black swans' as possible to the rest -- as well as organise all the other wonderful crimes of capitalism we have come to know and loathe.

[PoliticalNightmare]

*wooh free markets!*

[scarletghoul]

I'm sorry, who developed space technology again

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

^^^The State capitalists in the former USSR and China -- as well as 'free market' capitalist regimes in the USA and Europe.

Socialist states would have spent the money more wisely...:lol:

[Widerstand]

I wasn't aware that either Adam or Karl said we should "plan" innovation?

The reason free markets demonstrably don't work is investment: If there was no investment and only trade transactions, then maybe Adam Smiths wealth model would make sense. But investment furthers wealth inequalities, as those with more money can more easily make big investments and get even more money. The amount you can invest without risking bankruptcy, and ergo your possible profits, depend on how much money you already have - the rich get richer.

Nothing to do with either "luck" or "talent" or whatever.

That aside, I really have no idea what science has to do with free markets. Yes, central planning of innovation would be pretty bullocks (how do you plan discovery? you can only plan research), and yes, "incentives" don't matter for research, but precisely they don't because research is - corporate investment aside, which stifles rather than promotes - independent of markets.

This text is stupid.

[scarletghoul]

^^^The State capitalists in the former USSR and China -- as well as 'free market' capitalist regimes in the USA and Europe.

Socialist states would have spent the money more wisely...:lol:
Even if that's true its irrelevant as the OP's quote refers to central planning in general, whether socialist of capitalist. Indeed, the only way the US could compete with USSR central planning was to centrally plan their own space project.

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

^^^Good point.:)