Showing posts with label capitalism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label capitalism. Show all posts

Sunday, April 12, 2026

Rory Sutherland’s 10 Rules of Alchemy

Rory Sutherland is a vice president at Ogilvy in the UK. His YouTube videos advertise and promote the powers of myth, emotion, creativity, and passion. He tells good stories. He nods to reason, logic, and rationality because those are the proof of known, workable solutions. Sutherland’s thesis is that if we have a problem now it must be logic-proof or it would already have been solved and would not now exist. 

This is my summary. I recommend that you watch the video for yourself with CC:Closed Captions on. 



Rory Sutherland’s 10 Rules of Alchemy

  1. The opposite of a good idea can be another good idea. When we narrow down all options to the single rational choice, if it fails, no one can be blamed because they followed the data and the model. In fact, problems often have multiple solutions, different alternatives for other people whose values are not our own. 
  2. Do not design for the average. Look for the extreme. The average person will reject the unknown until other people make it a trend. Go for those other people.
  3. It does not pay to be logical when everyone else is logical. To overcome your competition in the market, find the errors in their models and meet those needs. He points out that every military seeks to design and implement surprises. 
  4. The nature of our intentions is the source of our internal tensions. His example is extreme though telling. His best hotel experience was in an East Berlin pad that must have been a police cell. If you were looking for a Ramada Inn you were going to be disappointed, but he wanted the experience of an East Berlin vacation and he was ecstatic. Know your true intentions and it will minimize your emotional tensions.
  5. A flower is just a weed with an advertising budget. Nature rewards and invests in reproductive strategies that are effective, even when seemingly inefficient. 
  6.  Logic kills off magic. The payoff for magic is the change in perception. Apple changed the perception of the computer. 
  7. A good guess plus empirical observation is still science. You can have a lucky guess and be right. **See below.
  8. Test the counter-intuitive things because nobody else will. Businesses must mainly follow the rational and logical and the data-driven because that is what is known to work. You still must set aside space—I take that to mean organizational as well as physical—to test random journeys.
  9. Rationality is a tool. If it is your only tool, then you are playing golf with just one club.
  10. Dare to be trivial. The butterfly effect is that a small change can have a large consequence. Add one sentence to the script of a call center and see what change it brings. 
  11. Do not limit yourself to ten rules. Rational people are everyone else. So, if there is a problem not solved now, it is logic-proof or would not exist. Be creative.
  12. Dare to look stupid. “Why do people dislike standing up on trains?” In fact, some prefer it for a moderate ride of 20 to 30 minutes because they have been sitting in a chair all day. If you notice, some people still stand even after sufficient seats have been vacated. For others, it might be the physical challenge of juggling one’s kit after you are already latched on to a pole. Ultimately, now we have privileged window seating perhaps with a tray or armrest and so on, and with others forced to stand in the middle with not much to do. He asks, what if, instead, we had rows of seats in the middle with the spaces near windows specially designed for restful standing, perhaps with cellphone chargers as well. Now, it looks different.
  13. Create net utility with a multivariate choice. Give people choices that optimize or minimize more than one variable and in disproportion so that whatever the outcome for the individual, you bring less regret. This is adaptive preference formation, a narrative for the support of choices.

** (Rory Sutherland cites Paul Feyerabend in asserting that advances in science have not come from applications of the scientific method but from intuition and insight. What the postmodernists ignore and would have us ignore in their program against reason is that you can only prove that your intuitive insight is truly scientific by following the scientific method so that you first and then others can test and replicate your work. Otherwise, you have nothing. The flash of insight and awareness can only be a reward for the rational, logical, empirical, experiential modes of learning as the preparation for better understanding and, ultimately, therefore, material abundance.) 


PREVIOUSLY ON NECESSARY FACTS


Entrepreneurship 

Innovation and Discovery 

The One Percent are the Atlases 

Shrugging the Stigma of Success 


Saturday, March 28, 2026

One Million Pageviews

Because I get paid to write what other people want, I write whatever I want here. And I am cognizant of the fact that other people read this. I put the URL on business contact cards and in email signature blocks. Lately, more hiring applications ask for links to portfolios and other social presence. Now, I more carefully inspect my attire before I step out into public spaces. Some market decision-maker might not like my opinions but they would find out the truth eventually. So, we are better off not starting a relationship. 

And I do take pride in writing what other people need. I love the craft of writing. I understand technical writing—procedures, plans, policies—as stories because if a machine operator has to call their boss at 4:00 AM, then reading a meter can be socially impactful, and maybe the best way to make the story stop is to hit ctrl-z. 


Last Seven Days Most Popular Posts and Locations


Last 30 Days Most Popular Posts and Locations


Last 12 Months Most Popular Posts and Locations



All Time Most Popular Posts and Locations


Top Referrering URLs Past 12 Months

One common phrase used against AIs is they are “scraping the web” and not being truly creative. “Scraping” sounds bad. I prefer the word “gathering.” The word “harvesting” implies “planting” or “seeding” and for that, we have no evidence, but gather—not scrape—is what they do. It is likely that many of the million pages viewed were touched by non-sentient programs, gathering information. Some of those might have been malicious seekers of exploitable vulnerabilities. That is why NecessaryFacts is closed to comments. I also rely on Google’s Red Team/Blue Team because when we lived in Ann Arbor, some of our colleagues in user groups touted their reward payments from Google for finding those vulns.


PREVIOUSLY ON NECESSARY FACTS


Supplies and Demands 

Money as a Crusoe Concept 

Mutiny Aboard the San Antonio 

Shifting the Paradigm of Private Security 


Monday, May 12, 2025

Official Innumeracy

Cutting tariffs by 115% means that everything gets a 15% subsidy, perhaps by a reduction in declared value. Secretary of the Treasury Scott Bessent certainly must know the difference. He went to Yale and worked for George Soros. I have to wonder why he did not correct his speechwriter. 


In other reports, the number was given correctly as “115 percentage points” to highlight the drop from 145% tariff to a 30% tariff for a net change of 79% downward on the American side. 


The wrong number was repeated by many news copiers ...

"One hundred percent" means "all of it."

... but was given the correct context by others. 


See, especially, The Detroit News.


PREVIOUSLY ON NECESSARY FACTS


The Success of the WEIRD People

Numismatics: History as Market 

The Art of Finance

Money as Press and Speech


Saturday, May 10, 2025

Brain Drain

Catching up on the weekends is difficult and I should have written this ten days ago when I first found the bifold handout in an engineering building on campus. Last night, I heard the term “brain drain” on NPR’s “All Things Considered.” I knew the phrase from the 1960s because of the foreign medical doctors living in our neighborhood near City Hospital (now “Cuyahoga County MetroHealth”). 



Long ago, when I was working for Kawasaki Robotics, one of the company officers said to me that he considered “international people” to be special in themselves, different from the people in their countries of origin.


On the way home last week with the handout in my kit bag it was pretty easy to guess that Hyundai was not the only multinational corporation recruiting at the University of Texas Austin, and that UT is not the only place that those companies are visiting. 


If you had come to America to earn a doctorate in engineering and you were not sure of your future status here, it would make sense to actively arrange your next port-of-call, rather than leaving that to an encounter not of your own planning. 


PREVIOUSLY ON NECESSARY FACTS


Anti-Intellectualism in American Life 


Teaching Ethics to Engineering Students 


ArmadilloCon 41 


Entrepreneurship 



Monday, June 10, 2024

Jim Simons and the Quants

Being centered on mathematicians, this book was not exciting, but it was interesting. James Harris “Jim” Simons (1938-2024) earned his doctorate at Berkeley, and worked for the NSA and the Institute for Defense Analysis, before teaching at Harvard and MIT. (Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Simons). And that is in this story, of course. The focus, however, is on Renaissance Technologies and their hedge funds (Medallion and others), the most successful trading firm in history. Simons’s background in language recognition—pattern recognition; pattern prediction—allowed him the insight to expect that correlations must exist across markets, even if causal factors ultimately remain hidden. Therefore, it should be possible to profit from trading on trends that are unexpected and unperceived by everyone else. He was right.

The Man Who Solved the Market:
How Jim Simons Launched
the Quant Revolution
 
by Gregory Zuckerman
(Penguin RandomHouse, 2019
)

The method was easy to explain: mine the data. Look at all the numbers from all the markets and seek out trends and patterns and correlations. Some turned out to be causative. Regression to the mean predicts that after some market has a remarkably bad day, prices will rebound. The prediction applies to hugely profitable days: the market reverts toward its previous level. That much is easy to understand. The rest never gets explained. 

 

For one thing, no one associated with Renaissance Technologies was willing to talk to Gregory Zuckerman because they were bound by deep long-term non-disclosure agreements. Aside from that, the powerhouse of the company was driven by its staff of Ph.D. mathematicians. It would have to be understood at their level before it could be explained to the rest of us. 

 

What can be understood is that on average, employees who invested with the firm earned about $50 million each. “Since 1988, Renaissance's flagship Medallion hedge fund has generated average annual returns of 66 percent, racking up trading profits of more than $100 billion…” (Introduction). With that money came power, of course. Robert Mercer put his ideology to work when he found Steve Bannon for the Donald Trump presidential campaign in 2016. However, Jim Simons was a Democrat. And he was not alone in that. Many of the academics in the firm were liberals and they contributed to political campaigns, naturally, and also to special foundations (some of their own creation) supporting education, medical research, and other social initiatives.

 

Jim Simons’s methodology was a long time coming. Computers were rare and costly. Ten years later, they acquired the first desktop computers, which were woefully underppowered by today's standards. Although he launched the firm specifically to mine data so that profits could be harvested from trends, Renaissance Technologies also employed traditional traders. The two teams often collided, with Jim Simons himself significantly abandoning the algorithms for what would be too easily called “gut instinct.” Sometimes, we just know.  Also, with that mountain of cash, and with their frequent intra-day trades, they did not need to be often right. At the peak, in Jim Simons’s last decade, with the models and algorithms and supercomputers all generating money, Renaissance Technologies was right only 51% of the time.

 


One aspect of the story which I believe explains as much of their success as their mathematical models, is that Renaissance Technologies adhered to the ideal academic organizational culture. Workspaces were open. Visiting around the office was common. Sharing ideas was habitual. Discussion and disagreement were encouraged. (Pages 199-203). (See also "Team of Teams" on this blog.) It was not always easy and some people never forgave others for their complete lack of social grace. Neither time nor money heals all wounds.


But we all enjoy the profits. Zuckerman presents this as a zero-sum game. For Renaissance Technologies to have profited, many other brokerages, whose clients were stereotypically “dentists” (and other middle class professionals), had to lose. It is true that every trading position requires two people with opposite expectations. Ultimately, conservation of energy (charge; spin) means that everything must be accounted for with nothing magically lost or gained. And yet here we are: 10 billion people, 50% of us in cities of over 1 million; flying around 10 kilometers above the ground or cruising on the ground at 100 kph. We could not have hunted and gathered enough to make this possible. If not for Jim Simons and Renaissance Technologies, we would each of us be poorer by unperceived small fractions that did not become the comforts we enjoy.


PREVIOUSLY ON NECESSARY FACTS

Two Books About Fermat’s Last Theorem 

The Remarkable Story of Risk 

Happy Pi Day of the Century 

Coins Without Realms (Digital Currency) 


Monday, December 12, 2022

LIKE SOMETHING OUT OF ATLAS SHRUGGED

Ayn Rand kept a "Horror File" of current news reports validating the worst aspects of her fictional universe in Atlas Shrugged. She said that she did that because often, in casual discussions at social occasions, someone would assert, "No one really believes those things!" or "No really says that." Well, yes, someone does and not just a random person but someone with social capital and personal status. 


Personally, I believe that from both an engineering standpoint and a market perspective, newer energy sources will eclipse oil and coal just as those outshone hardwood and charcoal. At the same time, I also believe in spontaneous order very well enucniated in Leonard E. Reed's essay, "I, Pencil" (Foundation for Economic Education here). 

Furthermore shutting off the oil that supplies you with heat and light and transportation will not deliver to me a solar-powered car, or a plasma power plant for my home.

More to the point, I believe that the people who oppose the production and delivery of oil today do not care if you have heat, light, and transportation (or food). They have them. So, they are satisified. And they have the leisure time to engage in an anti-industrial revolution. 

PREVIOUSLY ON NECESSARY FACTS

Jerry Emanuelson's Algebraic Proof of Ricardo's Law of Association

What is Legal Tender?

Money is Speech

Debt: The Seed of Civilization


Tuesday, March 8, 2022

World Peace Through World Trade

I stopped at Walmart because they have the best organic salad greens in a box at a price even lower than Whole Foods. Usually, it is a quick trip. This time all of the scanners near the groceries were gone and in their place were large boxes. After paying at a cashier's station, I took some snapshots.

Waiting to be uncrated

Each is half a unit.

Made in India. Over 7000 lbs of convenience.


The half that we consumers care about was made Mexico.

Previously on Necessary Facts

World Peace Through Massive Retaliation 

Chopmarks 

The Shroff 

Awesome Austin Foods at the Wheatsville Co-op 


Sunday, January 23, 2022

Massive Constellations of Artificial Satellites: What if they were natural?

Many of my colleagues in astronomy, both professional and amateur, are vocal in their opposition to Starlink, the SpaceX project that is placing thousands of satellites in orbit. They complain that imaging and other data gathering has been harmed or ruined by the tracks of these devices.  

What if Earth had a ring and these tracks were a consequence of our natural situation? Would the astronomers curse the ring and demand its destruction?

 

They want it stopped. They want the UN to do something. They vilify Elon Musk. They call the satellites junk and pollution. This is not merely a matter of a difficult technical problem like the construction of the Panama Canal or going to the Moon. It is an emotionally motivated attack on material progress, capitalism, and one audacious entrepreneur. 

 

If no one wanted these things, they would not be launched. The project cost is estimated at $30 billion (Reuters here.) It could fail, ultimately. Enterprise entails is risk. In fact, absent risk, there would be no enterprise. (Against the Gods: the Remarkable Story of Risk by Peter L. Bernstein reviewed here.) However, the basic fact of a perceived market still exists. 

 

One of my first university classes in sociology studied the workplace in America. The professor was a nice enough guy but accepted the usual complaint that corporations advertise to motivate to buy and do things that we do not really want. I understand. I certainly was never motivated to buy and drink Mountain Dew though millions of people have been. So, I went out online and found some easy examples of famously failed products. When vitamin-enhanced bottled water was first introduced, it failed, and was mocked in the advertising trade magazines. Starlink could fail. 


But it is not the first communication satellite. That honor goes to OSCAR-1 launched for the Amateur Radio Relay League six months before AT&T’s Telstar. So, these satellites have been “polluting” astronomical images for sixty years. No one seemed to care.

 

I believe that the detractors of progress are privileged and satisfied, enjoying their own comforts, and now wanting to deny those benefits to others. Back in the 1960s, one mock on British Labour was “Sod you, Jack. I’ve got mine.” Ludwig von Mises sketched out well the anti-capitalist mentality (Mises Institute here) as being motivated by envy and jealousy.

 

What if Earth had a natural ring? Other planets do. The four giants, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune have rings. Smaller planets do, also. The minor planet of Chariklo, Centaur 2006 Chiron, and trans-Neptunian minor planet Haumea all have rings. (See Caltech News here.)  Ontologically, Earth could as well. If we did and if views of the other planets, the stars, nebulae, etc., etc. were occasionally blocked or photographic plates captured their tracks what would be the response? 

 

Would astronomers wish for (or demand) a massive anti-satellite program? No one seems to be calling for weather modification to clear the sky of clouds on nights that astronomers want to work from their visual observatories. (Radio astronomy is not affected by clouds and rain.) 

 

PREVIOUSLY ON NECESSARY FACTS

 

Entrepreneurship 

Elon Musk and the Audacity of Entrepreneurship 

Supplies and Demands 

The Big Whimper of Modern Philosophy 

Saturday, January 15, 2022

The Invention of Enterprise

The Invention Of Enterprise: Entrepreneurship 

from Ancient Mesopotamia To Modern Times. 

David S. Landes, Joel Mokyr, William J. Baumol,. 

eds. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 

2010. 

THIS ANTHOLOGY DELIVERS 17 authoritative essays by accomplished scholars, surveying the sweep of history as seen from the vantage point of trade and commerce. The presentations on ten cultures from 20 different researchers are necessarily varied in perspective. Uniting them are their answers to the question, “What is entrepreneurship?” 


This review originally appeared in 

Libertarian Papers Vol. 3, Art. No. 15 (2011).


In the Preface by William J. Baumol, three hypotheses are presented. First, entrepreneurs find practical application for new inventions. However, in addition to those obviously creative actions, corrosive enterprises enrich their operatives without apparent net benefit to others. That, too, is enterprise because (third) “the direction taken by entrepreneurial activity depends heavily, at any particular time and in any particular society, on the prevailing institutional arrangements and the relative payoffs they offer…” Of course, other definitions have been offered. Peter Schumpeter, Israel Kirzner, Frank Knight, and even John Keynes are referenced across the essays. But these three hypotheses frame those other views.

Little here will be challenging, except, perhaps by omission. The Babylonians are here, but their long distance trade with the Hittites is not. Michael Hudson (“Entrepreneurs: from the Near Eastern Takeoff to the Roman Collapse”) validates our belief that Plato and Aristotle, among other sources, show that merchants and craftsmen were held in lower esteem than farmers and soldiers. That does not explain the invention of coinage, nor the contemporary rise of the tyrants as self-made men, nor the vibrant commerce in goods such as wines and ceramics that were nominally available both at home and from abroad. It may be that our assumptions are defined only by the surviving works of a few writers whose opinions are too easily accepted by the would-be philosopher-kings of later academies and lyceums.

Similarly, Louis P. Cain (“Entrepreneurship in the Antebellum United States”) chronicles Robert Fulton and Robert Livingston without mentioning their competitor, Cornelius Vanderbilt. Senator Douglas Stevens and the Illinois Central are here, but James J. Hill and the Great Northern are absent from “Entrepreneurship in the United States, 1865–1920,” by Naomi R. Lamoreaux. The history of the computer revolution covered by Margaret B. W. Graham, feels the same as Cornella Wunsch’s telling of the Neo- Babylonians: as if the author researched it professionally, without actually living through it. If Steven Levy’s Hackers: Heroes of the Computer Revolution were condensed to a dozen pages, it would identify the salient moments and crucial decisions of the significant entrepreneurs, which this chapter did not.

The economic histories of the Islamic/Arabic matrix, China and India, are each covered in single chapters. They are like a view of the Earth from the International Space Station: admiring the geography is easier than finding the people. Nonetheless, from orbit, a telescopic lens on a commercial television camera reveals water wells in the desert, each no more than two meters across. And here, too, within the panoramic sweep are individuals.

In “The Scale of Entrepreneurship in Middle Eastern History: Inhibitive Roles of Islamic Institutions,” by Timur Kuran we meet Ismail Abu Taqiyya, a coffee merchant who was active 1580 to 1620. (His story is told fully in Making Big Money in 1600: The Life and Times of Isma’il Abu Taqiyya, Egyptian Merchant by Nelly Hanna, Syracuse University Press, 1998.) Like many innovators, Abu Taqiyya met social and religious resistance: coffee was considered an intoxicant; and so “black water” was opposed by clerics. Mobs attacked and burned coffeehouses. Finally, in a courtroom, it was demonstrated that people who drink coffee exhibit no signs of slurred speech, dull wit, or lethargy.

In fact, we know Abu Taqiyya only from court proceedings. Few merchants of the Middle East left any personal financial records. Certainly, as a class, they were literate. They must have kept track of their sales and expenses. However, unlike their counterparts in Florence and Flanders, they had no strong tradition of record-keeping.

That fact reflects the fundamental barrier everywhere outside Western Europe—and there as well, until modern times: the family and the partnership were the only available modes of collective action.

It was difficult to create an enterprise that outlived its founders. That was true not only for the Middle East, but also for India, and China. By contrast, both the Babylonians and the Neo-Babylonians, whose temples were economic actors, did leave evidence of contracts extending across years and lifetimes.

Yet those family partnerships enabled trust, which is essential for transactions across space and time. Louis P. Cain (“Entrepreneurship in the Antebellum United States”) outlines the extension and expansion of the post office and the telegraph, both of which empowered communication that carried business news. Cain explicitly cites the invention of specialized commercial newspapers transported by U.S. Mail at favorable tariffs. Unfortunately, he says nothing about the competitors to the federal postal service. He also leaves out the U.S. Mint which in this era adopted steam engines to produce millions of uniform objects to close tolerance on a tight budget. However, he does support his claim that entrepreneurs of the time brought fundamental innovations to three key infrastructures: law, transportation and communication, and finance.

It is easy to quibble with details and to criticize the book they did not write. Only when we take an “orbital view” of the history of enterprise do those large features stand out in patterns. The editors and authors of this anthology show that enterprise is a complex phenomenon. Entrepreneurs find uses for new inventions. They seek out inefficiencies and [they] profit by reducing or removing them. They create novelties that destroy the patterns of existing goods and services. And they seek and gain special favors from political authorities. Entrepreneurs profit from war; but they do so only when and to the extent that their culture denigrates the merchant. When, as in Rome, the richest men claim poverty while using slaves to run their affairs, what we call “rent seeking” becomes the highest expression of enterprise.

Within that big picture, this anthology provides a wealth of facts, often as contrasts. Although Islamic law did not generally allow the existence of a non-corporeal entity, the waqf was adapted to that need. Originally intended to allow social service based on real estate—a well, for example—the waqf was extended to the caravansarai and eventually to pure cash holdings. Despite the anti-capitalist ethics that dominated Germany and France, non-state enterprises succeeded there, as well. Across the essays, the authors provide specific narratives of common themes such as the the varieties of business organizations, including partnerships, joint-stock corporations, and cartels, the use (and abuse) of patents, innovations in accounting, the nature of debt, and the contradictory impacts of religions.

Societies that hold merchants in high esteem enjoy material benefits. Evidence for that in this book comes from “The Golden Age of the Dutch Republic,” by Oscar Gelderblom, as well as the chapters covering England, and the United States. The status of the merchant in ancient India and China and in modern Japan validates that assumption. The best the merchant could hope for was benign neglect. Japan eclipsed India and China when merchants were elevated in the culture, granted not merely political power (though therewas that), but status and respect.

Allowing for some problematic distractions, this book can serve as an excellent primary text for a university class in economic history or as a supplemental assignment for a business school survey course in entrepreneurship. Aside from the content itself, each of these articles suggests topics for further study. Anyone who has already invested serious research in the development of trade and commerce will have questions— perhaps challenges—of their own to illuminate the work here. Thus, this anthology provides a reliable foundation for understanding how modern entrepreneurship came to be; and it also delivers a provocative engagement for new research and further discoveries.

Readers of this journal may not immediately recall the content of Ayn Rand’s essay, “The Intellectual Bankruptcy of Our Age” but they will not be surprised that Rand wrote a tract with that title. In The True Believer, Eric Hoffer warned that followers of mass movements often feel that they have access to special, even arcane, knowledge unavailable to, or unrecognized by, the mainstream culture. With that caveat as an anchor, it remains that several of the otherwise fine works here are tarnished by a kind of academic decadence, “death by citation.”

In the chapter “Entrepreneurship in France,” Michel Hau writes: “The persecutions of Protestants by Louis XIV (Lüthy 1955–1961) and then the troubles under the Revolution (Perrot 1982; Bonin 1985; Crouzet 1989; Aerts and Crouzet 1990) had more or less weakened entrepreneurship in many parts of France.” The facts are known to all; and Hau speaks to the expected, not the unusual. Moreover, Hau’s sentence contains modifiers (weasel words) “more or less” and “in many parts.” Of course, each chapter has its own bibliography, lest we suspect these professors of invention. Michel Hau provides 178 references for his 26 pages, including Weber’s Protestant Ethic in the original German.

In the chapter “Entrepreneurship in the United States, 1865–1920,” Naomi R. Lamoreaux conjurs five citations to bolster this claim: “There was no higher goal for a young American male to pursue during this period than to be a ‘self-made man’—to make a great deal of money through dint of his own hard work and ‘pluck.’” Anyone who wishes to tout the Gilded Age as an Era of Altruism will need to see her five and raise her one.

PREVIOUSLY ON NECESSARY FACTS