HP-3000 Systems Discussion wrote:
> Commodity futures, such as you mentioned at the end of your note, are
> a zero sum game. Therefore the knowledge to be consistently
> successful grows constantly (Kind of like an arms race does with
> weaponry).

Sorry, I don't follow the arms race thread.

> The futures market for 'terror' developed by DARPA would
> eventually, IMHO, lure the terrorists to invest (and back up with
> action) in order to fund their plans or a hedge fund for their
> failures.

Again, I don't follow.  In any betting scheme, the "house" sets odds so the
money is evenly split on either outcome.  In order for a terrorist to make
the big money, you have to guess what others are not.  Of course, there are
those who will bet on the long shot - witness any purchaser of a multi-State
lottery ticket.  They are the "noise".  If there's an increase in the
betting, and the target event is well-defined, then the information is out
there to start to prevent the act.  This is the signal.  If terrorists bet
on the event to happen to generate a false information and don't carry it
out or fail at doing it, well, they lose all of the money in the bet.  If a
terrorist bets against an unlikely event, tries and fails, then they won't
earn that much money.  What the DARPA folks are hoping is that the smaller
fish, someone resentful of the leadership, will show the cards by placing
bets.  It really seems like a pretty good way to get people to fess up.
Contrast this to listening to the talking-heads (analysts, not the group) on
TV or in the papers, who's free opinions are usually overcharged.

From an economic standpoint, it's pretty clever.  It may sound gruesome, but
like the article says, it's really no different than a term life policy
purchased by individuals and companies all around the world every single
day.

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *