NATION

PASSWORD

Game Theory For Baby Names

For discussion and debate about anything. (Not a roleplay related forum; out-of-character commentary only.)

Advertisement

Remove ads

User avatar
Ethel mermania
Post Kaiser
 
Posts: 91254
Founded: Aug 20, 2010
Father Knows Best State

Postby Ethel mermania » Wed Jan 03, 2018 2:41 pm

Camicon wrote:
Galloism wrote:Dunno, could be supremely rational if you are setting up side betting on the subject. But it would almost have to be someone famous to get people interested enough to gamble on the result.

Well, then the "game" wouldn't be bidding to name someone else's child, it would be fleecing idiots who are willing to spend money to name someone else's child.


50 bucks if you name all your male children ethel.


...... Oh wait.
The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion … but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.

http://www.salientpartners.com/epsilont ... ilizations

User avatar
Trumptonium
Minister
 
Posts: 2818
Founded: Jan 27, 2017
Ex-Nation

Postby Trumptonium » Wed Jan 03, 2018 3:56 pm

Galloism wrote:
Trumptonium wrote:
And what happens if you don't get a social security number for your child.

You can't claim them on your taxes.


Sounds utterly unimaginable. How can parents cope with this punishment? No wonder children are named before they're conceived.
Pro: Things and people I like
Anti: Things and people I dislike

https://www.bolsonaro.com.br/

User avatar
Camicon
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 14376
Founded: Aug 26, 2010
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Camicon » Wed Jan 03, 2018 4:26 pm

Salandriagado wrote:
Camicon wrote:Well, then the "game" wouldn't be bidding to name someone else's child, it would be fleecing idiots who are willing to spend money to name someone else's child.


I think you're missing the point. The strategy here is:

1) Open your books for bets on the name of the child.
2) Spend the minimum amount needed to force the name of the child to be something that nobody bet on.
3) Get more money from all of those bets that people lost than you spent in step 2.

I think you've misread me.

Xero's original scenario, letting people bid on what to name a child, is not a game theory scenario. Include the side bets and such and yes, you could have a game theory scenario, but then the "game" would be different; it wouldn't be bidding on the right to name a child, it would be managing a betting ring.

Xero's pseudo-auction charity is not a game theory scenario. It's incorrect to call it such, as the thread title does.
Ethel mermania wrote:
Camicon wrote:Well, then the "game" wouldn't be bidding to name someone else's child, it would be fleecing idiots who are willing to spend money to name someone else's child.


50 bucks if you name all your male children ethel.


...... Oh wait.

50 bucks per kid so named? Or 50 bucks now for future considerations?
Last edited by Camicon on Wed Jan 03, 2018 4:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Active since May, 2009
Country of glowing hearts, and patrons of the arts
Help me out
Star spangled madness, united sadness
Count me out
The Trews, Under The Sun
No human is more human than any other. - Lieutenant-General Roméo Antonius Dallaire
Don't shine for swine. - Metric, Soft Rock Star
Love is hell. Hell is love. Hell is asking to be loved. - Emily Haines and the Soft Skeleton, Detective Daughter

Why (Male) Rape Is Hilarious [because it has to be]

User avatar
Salandriagado
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 16980
Founded: Apr 03, 2008
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Salandriagado » Wed Jan 03, 2018 4:28 pm

Camicon wrote:
Salandriagado wrote:
I think you're missing the point. The strategy here is:

1) Open your books for bets on the name of the child.
2) Spend the minimum amount needed to force the name of the child to be something that nobody bet on.
3) Get more money from all of those bets that people lost than you spent in step 2.

I think you've misread me.

Xero's original scenario, letting people bid on what to name a child, is not a game theory scenario. Include the side bets and such and yes, you could have a game theory scenario, but then the "game" would be different; it wouldn't be bidding on the right to name a child, it would be managing a betting ring.

Xero's pseudo-auction charity is not a game theory scenario. It's incorrect to call it such, as the thread title does.


No, I think your'e misunderstanding the nature of Gallo's scam to fleece idiots using Xero's silly idea: it's not to fleece idiots willing to spend money to name a child, it's fleecing idiots willing to bet on such a thing. Different group of idiots.
Cosara wrote:
Anachronous Rex wrote:Good thing most a majority of people aren't so small-minded, and frightened of other's sexuality.

Over 40% (including me), are, so I fixed the post for accuracy.

Vilatania wrote:
Salandriagado wrote:
Notice that the link is to the notes from a university course on probability. You clearly have nothing beyond the most absurdly simplistic understanding of the subject.
By choosing 1, you no longer have 0 probability of choosing 1. End of subject.

(read up the quote stack)

Deal. £3000 do?[/quote]

Of course.[/quote]

User avatar
Camicon
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 14376
Founded: Aug 26, 2010
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Camicon » Wed Jan 03, 2018 4:35 pm

Salandriagado wrote:
Camicon wrote:I think you've misread me.

Xero's original scenario, letting people bid on what to name a child, is not a game theory scenario. Include the side bets and such and yes, you could have a game theory scenario, but then the "game" would be different; it wouldn't be bidding on the right to name a child, it would be managing a betting ring.

Xero's pseudo-auction charity is not a game theory scenario. It's incorrect to call it such, as the thread title does.


No, I think your'e misunderstanding the nature of Gallo's scam to fleece idiots using Xero's silly idea: it's not to fleece idiots willing to spend money to name a child, it's fleecing idiots willing to bet on such a thing. Different group of idiots.

I call that a distinction without substance. A moneyed fool is a moneyed fool.
Active since May, 2009
Country of glowing hearts, and patrons of the arts
Help me out
Star spangled madness, united sadness
Count me out
The Trews, Under The Sun
No human is more human than any other. - Lieutenant-General Roméo Antonius Dallaire
Don't shine for swine. - Metric, Soft Rock Star
Love is hell. Hell is love. Hell is asking to be loved. - Emily Haines and the Soft Skeleton, Detective Daughter

Why (Male) Rape Is Hilarious [because it has to be]

User avatar
Fartsniffage
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 29320
Founded: Dec 19, 2005
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby Fartsniffage » Wed Jan 03, 2018 4:36 pm

Salandriagado wrote:
Camicon wrote:I think you've misread me.

Xero's original scenario, letting people bid on what to name a child, is not a game theory scenario. Include the side bets and such and yes, you could have a game theory scenario, but then the "game" would be different; it wouldn't be bidding on the right to name a child, it would be managing a betting ring.

Xero's pseudo-auction charity is not a game theory scenario. It's incorrect to call it such, as the thread title does.


No, I think your'e misunderstanding the nature of Gallo's scam to fleece idiots using Xero's silly idea: it's not to fleece idiots willing to spend money to name a child, it's fleecing idiots willing to bet on such a thing. Different group of idiots.


I'm pretty sure you just described a huge fraction of the financial sector.....

User avatar
The Two Jerseys
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 11023
Founded: Jun 07, 2012
Father Knows Best State

Postby The Two Jerseys » Wed Jan 03, 2018 5:01 pm

Xero, any amount of money that I spend to name your kids "Beelzebub Niggerbeater" and "Clitoris Sieg-Heil" is totally worth it.
"The Duke of Texas" is too formal for regular use. Just call me "Your Grace".
"If I would like to watch goodness, sanity, God and logic being fucked I would watch Japanese porn." -Nightkill the Emperor
"This thread makes me wish I was a moron so that I wouldn't have to comprehend how stupid the topic is." -The Empire of Pretantia
Head of State: HM King Louis
Head of Government: The Rt. Hon. James O'Dell MP, Prime Minister
Ambassador to the World Assembly: HE Sir John Ross "J.R." Ewing II, Bt.
Join Excalibur Squadron. We're Commandos who fly Spitfires. Chicks dig Commandos who fly Spitfires.

User avatar
Galloism
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 55154
Founded: Aug 20, 2005
Father Knows Best State

Postby Galloism » Wed Jan 03, 2018 5:25 pm

The Two Jerseys wrote:Xero, any amount of money that I spend to name your kids "Beelzebub Niggerbeater" and "Clitoris Sieg-Heil" is totally worth it.

I'll chip in a couple bucks to a worthy cause.
Venicilian: wow. Jesus hung around with everyone. boys, girls, rich, poor(mostly), sick, healthy, etc. in fact, i bet he even went up to gay people and tried to heal them so they would be straight.
The Parkus Empire: Being serious on NSG is like wearing a suit to a nude beach.
New Kereptica: Since power is changed energy over time, an increase in power would mean, in this case, an increase in energy. As energy is equivalent to mass and the density of the government is static, the volume of the government must increase.


User avatar
Ethel mermania
Post Kaiser
 
Posts: 91254
Founded: Aug 20, 2010
Father Knows Best State

Postby Ethel mermania » Wed Jan 03, 2018 6:08 pm

Camicon wrote:
Salandriagado wrote:
I think you're missing the point. The strategy here is:

1) Open your books for bets on the name of the child.
2) Spend the minimum amount needed to force the name of the child to be something that nobody bet on.
3) Get more money from all of those bets that people lost than you spent in step 2.

I think you've misread me.

Xero's original scenario, letting people bid on what to name a child, is not a game theory scenario. Include the side bets and such and yes, you could have a game theory scenario, but then the "game" would be different; it wouldn't be bidding on the right to name a child, it would be managing a betting ring.

Xero's pseudo-auction charity is not a game theory scenario. It's incorrect to call it such, as the thread title does.
Ethel mermania wrote:
50 bucks if you name all your male children ethel.


...... Oh wait.

50 bucks per kid so named? Or 50 bucks now for future considerations?


All future considerations contract payable in full on first delivey, 5 day net.
The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion … but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.

http://www.salientpartners.com/epsilont ... ilizations

User avatar
South Bagus Nakalca
Lobbyist
 
Posts: 12
Founded: May 11, 2017
New York Times Democracy

Postby South Bagus Nakalca » Wed Jan 03, 2018 6:13 pm

I don't really understand this thread but I just loved the titled and wanted to be a part of it. Have a great day! :bow:

User avatar
Ethel mermania
Post Kaiser
 
Posts: 91254
Founded: Aug 20, 2010
Father Knows Best State

Postby Ethel mermania » Wed Jan 03, 2018 6:19 pm

South Bagus Nakalca wrote:I don't really understand this thread but I just loved the titled and wanted to be a part of it. Have a great day! :bow:

Dont sweqat, None of us understand it either,
The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion … but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.

http://www.salientpartners.com/epsilont ... ilizations

User avatar
Insaeldor
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5291
Founded: Aug 26, 2014
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Insaeldor » Wed Jan 03, 2018 6:28 pm

What about just having the kid with someone else and naming it a name you like?
Time is a prismatic uniform polyhedron

User avatar
Fartsniffage
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 29320
Founded: Dec 19, 2005
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby Fartsniffage » Wed Jan 03, 2018 6:33 pm

Insaeldor wrote:What about just having the kid with someone else and naming it a name you like?


As insane as most of the threads made by this poster are, this one has at least a grain of sense in it. There are plenty of first world countries that have lists of names that must be picked from, you can't always just chose the name you like.

User avatar
Xerographica
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5885
Founded: Aug 15, 2012
Capitalist Paradise

Postby Xerographica » Wed Jan 03, 2018 6:48 pm

Allanea wrote:
Let's take "dumb" to mean "useless". Do we need to measure the usefulness of a name? If so, what's the best way to do so? Personally, I don't think that voting is a useful measure of usefulness. If you vote for a name it just means that you think it's useful. But your vote really doesn't reveal just how useful the name is to you. It seems problematic for the rest of us to be in the dark about how useful a name is to you.


But why do names need to be useful, at all?

Well... how would you pronounce "Hr}~*4^:_X6Eh2tR"? Don't try and pronounce it, you might pull a muscle in your mouth. One band I really like is named "Air". So it doesn't really work to tell somebody, "I really like Air." They won't be able to see that I capitalized "Air". So I'd have to say, "I really like the band Air."

How many people participated in the process of deciding to name the band "Air"? Did one person decide it? Or maybe a dozen? For me the inherent problem with too few people deciding a name is that it increases the chances they will overlook obvious problems with a name. More heads are better than less heads.

Democracy can involve countless heads. The problem is that there's no mechanism to filter out the frivolous input. It's a very different story with markets. The mechanism that markets use to filter out frivolous input is called "willingness to pay". The more money that you're willing to pay for something, the more useful it must be to you. Unless you're crazy. Fortunately, most people aren't crazy.

If we used spending for names then far more useful names would be given to everything. There would be far fewer redundant names (air vs Air) and all names would be easier to pronounce and remember.

User avatar
The Two Jerseys
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 11023
Founded: Jun 07, 2012
Father Knows Best State

Postby The Two Jerseys » Wed Jan 03, 2018 6:55 pm

Xerographica wrote:
Allanea wrote:
But why do names need to be useful, at all?

Well... how would you pronounce "Hr}~*4^:_X6Eh2tR"? Don't try and pronounce it, you might pull a muscle in your mouth. One band I really like is named "Air". So it doesn't really work to tell somebody, "I really like Air." They won't be able to see that I capitalized "Air". So I'd have to say, "I really like the band Air."

How many people participated in the process of deciding to name the band "Air"? Did one person decide it? Or maybe a dozen? For me the inherent problem with too few people deciding a name is that it increases the chances they will overlook obvious problems with a name. More heads are better than less heads.

Democracy can involve countless heads. The problem is that there's no mechanism to filter out the frivolous input. It's a very different story with markets. The mechanism that markets use to filter out frivolous input is called "willingness to pay". The more money that you're willing to pay for something, the more useful it must be to you. Unless you're crazy. Fortunately, most people aren't crazy.

If we used spending for names then far more useful names would be given to everything. There would be far fewer redundant names (air vs Air) and all names would be easier to pronounce and remember.

Or (far more likely) you'd have a lot more names like "Auschwitz-Makes-Me-Smile redtube.com"...
"The Duke of Texas" is too formal for regular use. Just call me "Your Grace".
"If I would like to watch goodness, sanity, God and logic being fucked I would watch Japanese porn." -Nightkill the Emperor
"This thread makes me wish I was a moron so that I wouldn't have to comprehend how stupid the topic is." -The Empire of Pretantia
Head of State: HM King Louis
Head of Government: The Rt. Hon. James O'Dell MP, Prime Minister
Ambassador to the World Assembly: HE Sir John Ross "J.R." Ewing II, Bt.
Join Excalibur Squadron. We're Commandos who fly Spitfires. Chicks dig Commandos who fly Spitfires.

User avatar
Sovaal
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 13016
Founded: Mar 17, 2017
New York Times Democracy

Postby Sovaal » Wed Jan 03, 2018 7:02 pm

Thermodolia wrote:Um there is a time limit, it's called birth. Ya need a name before the kid is born. Also I'm extremely confused about how my future boyfriend is pregos

Life, life finds a way Therms.
Last edited by Sovaal on Wed Jan 03, 2018 7:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Dirty centrist
Unapologetic Jon Snow supporter
"Rifles, muskets, long-bows and hand-grenades are inherently democratic weapons. A complex weapon makes the strong stronger, while a simple weapon – so long as there is no answer to it – gives claws to the weak.” - George Orwell

User avatar
Xerographica
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5885
Founded: Aug 15, 2012
Capitalist Paradise

Postby Xerographica » Wed Jan 03, 2018 7:23 pm

Insaeldor wrote:What about just having the kid with someone else and naming it a name you like?

No man is an island,
Entire of itself,
Every man is a piece of the continent,
A part of the main.
If a clod be washed away by the sea,
Europe is the less.
As well as if a promontory were.
As well as if a manor of thy friend's
Or of thine own were:
Any man's death diminishes me,
Because I am involved in mankind,
And therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls;
It tolls for thee.
- John Donne

You aren't going to be the only person using your kid's name. Your kid will be a member of society. As such, it seems reasonable to give society the opportunity to help name its newest member. Let me be clear. I definitely wouldn't want to mandate this. But my best guess is that, chances are really good that the name that the market gives your kid will be far more useful than any name that you could come up with.

The market is based on the premise that, no matter how useful any producer considers their product to be, its true usefulness should be ultimately determined by consumers.

Consumers > Producers

The more money that consumers are willing to spend on a product, the more useful it is to them.

For all intents and purposes a name is a product. Right now, with traditional naming, every person will judge, for themselves, the usefulness of your kid's name. The less useful your kid's name is to others, the more people will perceive that you made a mistake. The fact of the matter is that nobody would benefit from this mistake. Your kid certainly would be worse off, and so would society. Nobody is an island.

Since the market's premise is that consumers > producers, why not just let consumers name your kid? Consumers would logically spend the most money on the most useful name (product). If not, then the market's premise is really wrong.
Last edited by Xerographica on Wed Jan 03, 2018 7:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Xerographica
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5885
Founded: Aug 15, 2012
Capitalist Paradise

Postby Xerographica » Wed Jan 03, 2018 7:27 pm

The Two Jerseys wrote:
Xerographica wrote:Well... how would you pronounce "Hr}~*4^:_X6Eh2tR"? Don't try and pronounce it, you might pull a muscle in your mouth. One band I really like is named "Air". So it doesn't really work to tell somebody, "I really like Air." They won't be able to see that I capitalized "Air". So I'd have to say, "I really like the band Air."

How many people participated in the process of deciding to name the band "Air"? Did one person decide it? Or maybe a dozen? For me the inherent problem with too few people deciding a name is that it increases the chances they will overlook obvious problems with a name. More heads are better than less heads.

Democracy can involve countless heads. The problem is that there's no mechanism to filter out the frivolous input. It's a very different story with markets. The mechanism that markets use to filter out frivolous input is called "willingness to pay". The more money that you're willing to pay for something, the more useful it must be to you. Unless you're crazy. Fortunately, most people aren't crazy.

If we used spending for names then far more useful names would be given to everything. There would be far fewer redundant names (air vs Air) and all names would be easier to pronounce and remember.

Or (far more likely) you'd have a lot more names like "Auschwitz-Makes-Me-Smile redtube.com"...

The market would be pretty useless if the most money was spent on the least useful products.

User avatar
Fartsniffage
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 29320
Founded: Dec 19, 2005
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby Fartsniffage » Wed Jan 03, 2018 7:31 pm

Xerographica wrote:
The Two Jerseys wrote:Or (far more likely) you'd have a lot more names like "Auschwitz-Makes-Me-Smile redtube.com"...

The market would be pretty useless if the most money was spent on the least useful products.


You think that companies wouldn't spend money to advertise? I imagine there would be many little redtube out there sucking on their mammas mammaries. And redtube would be trying to capitalise on that.

User avatar
Xerographica
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5885
Founded: Aug 15, 2012
Capitalist Paradise

Postby Xerographica » Wed Jan 03, 2018 8:37 pm

Fartsniffage wrote:
Xerographica wrote:The market would be pretty useless if the most money was spent on the least useful products.


You think that companies wouldn't spend money to advertise? I imagine there would be many little redtube out there sucking on their mammas mammaries. And redtube would be trying to capitalise on that.

I have absolutely no idea how much money any company would be willing to spend on naming babies. Are baby names really the best way to advertise a company? How does Amazon's head of marketing pitch baby names to Jeff Bezos? "We should spend $10 million dollars on baby names because... " Voila! A bunch of kids named "Kindle" running around.

Imagine that you're Barnes and Noble's head of marketing. You go to the market naming website, search for "Kindle" and see a list of all the babies with this potential name. You click on the first result and see...

1. Kindle: $4,500
2. Samantha: $2,000
3. Gertrude: $100

What do you do? Do you submit "Nook" as a potential name? If so, you'd have to outspend "Kindle". Alternatively, you could spend money on "Samantha". Or you could search for a baby that doesn't have "Kindle" submitted to it and submit "Nook" to it. Of course, you know that Amazon's head of marketing will search the market naming website for "Nook". So maybe your best strategy is to join forces with the people who prefer "Samantha".

Worst case scenario, if baby naming does turn out to be so lucrative, that's a lot of money raised for college.

User avatar
Neanderthaland
Minister
 
Posts: 2332
Founded: Sep 10, 2016
Ex-Nation

Postby Neanderthaland » Wed Jan 03, 2018 8:42 pm

I guess if Grandma wants the baby named after her shes going to have to dig into that there social security a bit.

Sorry Grandma, if you really cared you would have skimped on the glaucoma medication.
Ug make fire. Mod ban Ug.

User avatar
Galloism
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 55154
Founded: Aug 20, 2005
Father Knows Best State

Postby Galloism » Wed Jan 03, 2018 9:42 pm

Xerographica wrote:
Fartsniffage wrote:
You think that companies wouldn't spend money to advertise? I imagine there would be many little redtube out there sucking on their mammas mammaries. And redtube would be trying to capitalise on that.

I have absolutely no idea how much money any company would be willing to spend on naming babies. Are baby names really the best way to advertise a company? How does Amazon's head of marketing pitch baby names to Jeff Bezos? "We should spend $10 million dollars on baby names because... " Voila! A bunch of kids named "Kindle" running around.

Imagine that you're Barnes and Noble's head of marketing. You go to the market naming website, search for "Kindle" and see a list of all the babies with this potential name. You click on the first result and see...

1. Kindle: $4,500
2. Samantha: $2,000
3. Gertrude: $100

What do you do? Do you submit "Nook" as a potential name? If so, you'd have to outspend "Kindle". Alternatively, you could spend money on "Samantha". Or you could search for a baby that doesn't have "Kindle" submitted to it and submit "Nook" to it. Of course, you know that Amazon's head of marketing will search the market naming website for "Nook". So maybe your best strategy is to join forces with the people who prefer "Samantha".

Worst case scenario, if baby naming does turn out to be so lucrative, that's a lot of money raised for college.

Let me ask you something Xero. If you walked into a company marketing department - or any company department for that matter - and said "I have an idea. I don't have any idea what it will do, what the results will be, if they'll be good or bad, have done zero research on the subject, and let's implement it immediately and see what happens", what do you think their response would be?
Venicilian: wow. Jesus hung around with everyone. boys, girls, rich, poor(mostly), sick, healthy, etc. in fact, i bet he even went up to gay people and tried to heal them so they would be straight.
The Parkus Empire: Being serious on NSG is like wearing a suit to a nude beach.
New Kereptica: Since power is changed energy over time, an increase in power would mean, in this case, an increase in energy. As energy is equivalent to mass and the density of the government is static, the volume of the government must increase.


User avatar
Bombadil
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8480
Founded: Oct 13, 2011
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Bombadil » Wed Jan 03, 2018 9:54 pm

Galloism wrote:
Xerographica wrote:I have absolutely no idea how much money any company would be willing to spend on naming babies. Are baby names really the best way to advertise a company? How does Amazon's head of marketing pitch baby names to Jeff Bezos? "We should spend $10 million dollars on baby names because... " Voila! A bunch of kids named "Kindle" running around.

Imagine that you're Barnes and Noble's head of marketing. You go to the market naming website, search for "Kindle" and see a list of all the babies with this potential name. You click on the first result and see...

1. Kindle: $4,500
2. Samantha: $2,000
3. Gertrude: $100

What do you do? Do you submit "Nook" as a potential name? If so, you'd have to outspend "Kindle". Alternatively, you could spend money on "Samantha". Or you could search for a baby that doesn't have "Kindle" submitted to it and submit "Nook" to it. Of course, you know that Amazon's head of marketing will search the market naming website for "Nook". So maybe your best strategy is to join forces with the people who prefer "Samantha".

Worst case scenario, if baby naming does turn out to be so lucrative, that's a lot of money raised for college.

Let me ask you something Xero. If you walked into a company marketing department - or any company department for that matter - and said "I have an idea. I don't have any idea what it will do, what the results will be, if they'll be good or bad, have done zero research on the subject, and let's implement it immediately and see what happens", what do you think their response would be?


To be fair if it's the marketing department they'll probably go for it..
Eldest, that's what I am...Tom remembers the first raindrop and the first acorn...he knew the dark under the stars when it was fearless — before the Dark Lord came from Outside..

User avatar
Xerographica
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5885
Founded: Aug 15, 2012
Capitalist Paradise

Postby Xerographica » Wed Jan 03, 2018 9:55 pm

Neanderthaland wrote:I guess if Grandma wants the baby named after her shes going to have to dig into that there social security a bit.

Sorry Grandma, if you really cared you would have skimped on the glaucoma medication.

Well yeah! Grandma has to decide for herself how big of a sacrifice her granddaughter's name is truly worth. Same with Grandpa... and the other two grandparents... and the parents... and the siblings... and the cousins... and the aunts and uncles... and the family friends... and the neighbors... and countless other people.

Everybody decides for themselves how big of a sacrifice the baby's name is truly worth.

X = the amount of thought that goes into traditional naming
Y = the amount of thought that goes into market naming

X < Y

Y is greater than X. It's much greater! What kinda parent wouldn't want to maximize the amount of thought that goes into their baby's name?

Imagine if God existed. Wouldn't you want him to name your kid? Well, as far as I know, the market is the closest thing we have to God. The market is the greatest amount of brainpower and information that can be used for any given decision. We currently really underestimate the usefulness of this God because we can't see all its brainpower/information. How do we quantify any given family's brainpower/information? How do we quantify this community's brainpower/information? We can't. Not yet at least.

Of course, as somebody who is willing to make big sacrifices to the market God, I'm admittedly super biased. So it's entirely possible that I'm overestimating the usefulness of my God. This is why I really appreciate the necessity of devising experiments to test my God's usefulness.

User avatar
The Two Jerseys
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 11023
Founded: Jun 07, 2012
Father Knows Best State

Postby The Two Jerseys » Wed Jan 03, 2018 9:59 pm

Xerographica wrote:
Neanderthaland wrote:I guess if Grandma wants the baby named after her shes going to have to dig into that there social security a bit.

Sorry Grandma, if you really cared you would have skimped on the glaucoma medication.

Well yeah! Grandma has to decide for herself how big of a sacrifice her granddaughter's name is truly worth. Same with Grandpa... and the other two grandparents... and the parents... and the siblings... and the cousins... and the aunts and uncles... and the family friends... and the neighbors... and countless other people.

Everybody decides for themselves how big of a sacrifice the baby's name is truly worth.

X = the amount of thought that goes into traditional naming
Y = the amount of thought that goes into market naming

X < Y

Y is greater than X. It's much greater! What kinda parent wouldn't want to maximize the amount of thought that goes into their baby's name?

Imagine if God existed. Wouldn't you want him to name your kid? Well, as far as I know, the market is the closest thing we have to God. The market is the greatest amount of brainpower and information that can be used for any given decision. We currently really underestimate the usefulness of this God because we can't see all its brainpower/information. How do we quantify any given family's brainpower/information? How do we quantify this community's brainpower/information? We can't. Not yet at least.

Of course, as somebody who is willing to make big sacrifices to the market God, I'm admittedly super biased. So it's entirely possible that I'm overestimating the usefulness of my God. This is why I really appreciate the necessity of devising experiments to test my God's usefulness.

Question for you: why are you proposing a solution to a problem that nobody has?
"The Duke of Texas" is too formal for regular use. Just call me "Your Grace".
"If I would like to watch goodness, sanity, God and logic being fucked I would watch Japanese porn." -Nightkill the Emperor
"This thread makes me wish I was a moron so that I wouldn't have to comprehend how stupid the topic is." -The Empire of Pretantia
Head of State: HM King Louis
Head of Government: The Rt. Hon. James O'Dell MP, Prime Minister
Ambassador to the World Assembly: HE Sir John Ross "J.R." Ewing II, Bt.
Join Excalibur Squadron. We're Commandos who fly Spitfires. Chicks dig Commandos who fly Spitfires.

PreviousNext

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Ameriganastan, ArchD, Bogan Laker, Diwi, Dumb Ideologies, Duvniask, Eastfield Lodge, EldrichVoid1-3, Furries and Furries, Gallade, Graag Brom, Haishan, Heloin, Hrythingia, Hurdergaryp, Ifreann, Infected Mushroom, Kannap, Kernen, LiberNovusAmericae, Oceasia, Page, Rising of the Forgotten, Selissu, The Greater Ohio Valley, The Grim Reaper, The Grims, The New California Republic, Tomislavia, Topoliani, Valrifell, Western Vale Confederacy, Yahoo [Bot]

Advertisement

Remove ads