Categories
technology

IRMA v Eircom

I can’t help but think that the settlement reached in the IRMA v Eircom case is going to be bad for Irish citizens. It’s not clear to me why Eircom capitulated but I presume their legal advisors believed a win was unlikely. . Silicon Republic has a piece here regarding the recent “landmark settlment”
The settlement isn’t actually a “precedent” as such but it does make it unlikely that other ISP’s wouldn’t atttempt a defence suggesting they didn’t have any responsibility for their customers’ actions using their access networks. Pity, it’s a bit like holding the roads authority liable for losses arising from bad driving. Maybe that would be a good idea šŸ™‚
The problem that I have with this settlement is that it’s private in both its complete terms and the outline of its implementation. It’s unclear how Eircom will implement the suggested 3 strikes policy. I simply don’t trust the music companies or any company they subcontract to reliably identify those participating in P2P filesharing activities. Recollections of unscrupulous activities on behalf of the RIAA abound.
Evidence of false accusations arising from a similar activity in the US have already been documented. See el reg for more info. .
So under the recent settlement, as it’s been detailed so far, an Eircom ISP customer can be disconnected based on accusations, nothing more. The state is not involved in investigating and verifying these accusations. No coherent case is necessary beyond a computer log provided by DetecNet or whoever is subcontracted to provide this service. Quite frankly, that sucks.
Readers of this blog will notice that I normally come down hard on all forms of “freetardation” or the belief that people should be able to rip off other people’s products because it’s technically possible to do so. I’m not sorry for the publishers who find themselves as technological dinosaurs struggling to adapt. Their businesses will change. Some will prosper and some will die. Technology will always dramatically change some businesses. It’s the artists I feel most sorry for as they should be rewarded for their creative works.
This settlement doesn’t really further their rights however. The EU Parliament has already voted against such 3 strikes rules which have been introduced in France. Also described here. The EU parliament reasonably decided that only a judicial process should be able to disconnect someone from the internet. This is reasonable for democratic reasons. Think about the democratic abuse possible when citizens can be disconnected based on unsubstantiated accusations. If it happened in China we’d be agressively pointed fingers.
However, the European Commission, are doing their level best to overturn the amendment which would remove all obligation from ISP’s for content filtering and summary disconnection. This, in a nutshell, is why I’m going to vote NO for a second time to Lisbon. The European Parliament undoubtedly has a conscience but the Commission panders to big business, the larger EU countries and isn’t too concerned with the idea of separation of powers.
The media publishing companies might be over the moon but we now have a settlement where a disproporationate penalty can be imposed on any individual or business which is accused of engaging in this illegal activity without the oversight of the judiciary. Just because the publishers are sustaining loss doesn’t mean they should be able to act unilaterally or suspend the judicial process.
I sincerely hope one of the Irish ISP’s decides to fight this case rather than acquiesce.

Categories
Uncategorized

Us and Them

I notice that the private sector have now decided they’re supporting the public sector who are being described as “parasites” or “wastrels” by some commentators.
The whole private sector supporting the public sector thing is a bit of a crock. In effect both private and public sectors getting loans they couldn’t afford to buy houses that were over-priced and giving the government over a billion in stamp duty a year was a huge part of the problem.We’ve been living on an overdraft often provided by Arab and Chinese investors for the past 15 years.Our public sector didn’t look disastrously expensive to the exchequer when everybody was all spending like there was no tomorrow. Unfortunately, tomorrow came.
So now we’re figuring out who to blame when nobody is spending in an economy reliant on spending and extravagance for tax revenue. Spending has decreased much more than unemployment so it’s not that everyone is on the dole. Are we so much poorer on a monthly income basis than in 2007, excluding asset value from houses? I don’t think so. Spending is depressed as people have actually started to think about saving based on a panic and an inability to get more debt to fund more things they don’t need. This isn’t the fault of public or private sectors. In particular a big chunk of the shortfall is a collapse in the housing market, the biggest sign of our extravagant tiger years. It’s not that nobody can afford to buy houses anymore, it’s that the prices haven’t dropped far enough. The only people who don’t publicly admit this are auctioneers and/or politicians. There’s a lot of overlap between the two šŸ™‚
I’d contend that there’s something worse than mere deflation, it’s long term consistent deflation. It’s depressing and discourages all sorts of investment. David McWilliams suggestion regarding a 20 year moving average for property valuations is one mechanism of drawing a line in the sand regarding the current house prices versus their actual value. Helping developers to cling on to delusional notions of a recovery in property value is actually only harming the situation. Everyone is waiting for the collapse so nobody will buy now. The end result is that the property chain is frozen and stamp duty revenue is being lost.
Now that the builder bank is nationalised, the government could call in NPL’s and put the resulting already developed properties to auction to find their true market value. We’re better off to get people buying at knock down prices now than to perpetuate a bluffing game that’s already gone on for more than 12 months. At worst we’d confirm what the markets believe, that our banks face a huge asset write-down. Remember that perpetuating this is now costing every taxpayer in the state as we’ve guaranteed the interbank loans of these banks. Whatever our investments are used for it shouldn’t be kicking out maturities or allowing interest holidays for breakfast roll men while they wait for pigs to fly and the market to recover.

Categories
economics

Blue swan with pink spots

Could perhaps be created using genetic engineering in the future šŸ™‚ I’ve been reading Nassim Taleb’s The Black Swan. It’s an engaging book once you get beyond the pages and pages of insults directed against professional statisticians.
They key point could be summarised as follows. Professional statisticians have become obsessed with applying gaussian distribution models to real world phenomenon which don’t match the model for a range of reasons. Primarily the gaussian model attaches a lower probability to rarer events than is actually the case in many real world phenomenon such as degrees of wealth. When these models are used for prediction and risk management the results may be acceptable when making predictions about data close to the median but are hugely error prone about rarer conditions. The seeming success of the model in limited predictions promotes over-confidence and encourages further bad predictions.
Mr. Taleb goes on to point out that Mandelbrotian randomness more accurately depicts many phenomenon as it allows for greater deviations within a sample and more probable outliers. The point is made enthusiastically and in an idiosyncratic style. It’s accessible in a way that encourages most people to understand the contents and query current models for market analysis. It’s not an in-depth mathematical treatise and this is ultimately a weakness given some of the grand claims. However, Taleb’s rage at the amount of bullshit spouted by should-know-better financial and quantitative engineers is understandable. You only have to watch market analysts in programmes on CNN, MSNBC to figure out that, with a lot of jargon, there’s often not a lot of actual knowledge or understanding. Differences of opinion and rude/crude arguments abound but few of the experts called the current crisis. What’s the point of accepted financial models if they’re not just unsuccessful at predicting (a very hard task) but cause risk to be discounted (a very bad thing)? The Black Swan is essential reading for anyone who’s blithely applying statistical models to whatever economic, marketing or social science application they’re working on. It should give them pause for thought.
So, back to my headline. Mankind are great at producing huge inequalities and surprising outliers. History is littered with them! The more power we achieve over our environment and, indeed, our genetics the more probable the improbable becomes. I’d content that the number of potential black swans increasing (if that isn’t too wild any idea). Not in a linear way of course. More of a giant leap, black swan, kind of increments šŸ™‚ We’ve found black swans on the moon, black swans in space, black swans in the earth, on the earth and with genetic engineering we can create human black swans. Scary.
So the current market models are deeply flawed. Indeed they don’t seem so much models as talking points for TV debates. Who predicted the crisis? Currently in the “Deep Financial Shit is Nigh” hall of fame are international players like Peter Schiff, Nassim Taleb and local players like David McWilliams, Alan Ahearne and Morgan Kelly. Very few economists correctly predicted the current crisis nationally or internationally.
I believe one reason for this is that it became fashionable for these most miserable of analysts to predict boom followed by a soft landing. Economists by their nature are supposed to be pessimistic and risk aware. They should be over-predicting recessions, which is the butt of the famous economist joke.

“An economist is a person who predicts 10 of the last 3 economic recessions”

In this case, there seems to have been an international fear of being caught out in predicting an end to this boom, fueled by financial innovations in the bond market. Many economists simply suspended disbelief even when scandals like Enron encouraged skepticism. Conversely this old joke gives the lie to the belief that economists create recessions. They make predictions and pass comments. Some may add to recessions and further despair but if they could really create economic turmoil then their predictions would never be wrong!

Categories
economics

Nash, McWilliams and an economy of words

I picked up this link in my travels. The article contains an interview with John Nash where he discusses the current economic crisis.

ā€œI get the impression that the government is not ready to do anything that is really beyond a short-term basis,ā€ said Nash, a senior research mathematician at Princeton. ā€œ[But] we need a natural stability of value.ā€

Nash advocates an international monetary system with suitable accords like a new Bretton Woods. He fundamentally believes that such a system should be democratically introduced. He believes that short-termist keynesianism has wrecked the stability of the financial system. A big problem he has cited now and in the past is the variable rate mortgage. Should home-owners really be speculating on their repayments? Do many really understand the implications?
In many cases the illusion of liquidity was craved more than any tangible value. The sprocket-loan derivative market (fictional I HOPE) could be a great source of earnings as long as people kept buying sprockets. If they slow down, the mechanics of the market falls apart as, like a Ponzi scheme, it’s reliant on getting more derivative buyers in so previous buyers can bail out at a profit.
Something like the gold standard has always been deemed inflexible in times of extravagance, mostly due to the cost of warfare. Does anything good come out of a fiat currency, unbacked by commodities? Does it really create sustainable wealth that wouldn’t arise otherwise?
Is the opportunity it creates simply too hazardous to our wealth (and health)?
Despite his well-documented problems Nash is, perhaps the world’s most famous and most brilliant economist with a formidable reputation as a pure mathematician. His comments ring true and this crisis is an opportunity to bring about a more conservative economic system again with less exotic derivative products acting as “get rick quick” mechanisms for greedy hedge funders. Still you have to be brave and a bit different to affect real change.
Right now, we really need change. Lateral thinking backed by some pragmatic experience. One way to do this is to put someone in charge of the banks in this country who thinks differently Which brings me around to the obvious conclusion that Lenihan should appoint David McWilliams as the CEO of one of the banks. Yes, the floppy ginger haired bloke who used to present Agenda and wrote those books about our economic rise and fall. If anything, he’s got timing and great TV hair. Very important in a bank CEO.
I’m deadly serious here. McWilliams has the credentials and the experience of the banking sector. He has worked in the central bank, as an analyst for UBS and as a director of BNP. His predictions have been prescient yet he appears to listen and respond to criticism well, certainly on the evidence of his blog. When an idea is berated he’ll discuss it rationally, responding reasonably to even savage criticism. We don’t get much of that in the FF-led government these days. BIFFOT, Minister for Cork & Battman don’t seem able to take criticism with anything less than a snarl. Then there’s my namesake.. šŸ™
On the positive side the Walking Handshake from Drumcondra is gone!
Even more importantly, McWIlliams would scare the over-leveraged but still living shit out of the incumbents. He’s been attacking them for years so imagine their discomfort to be faced with him as their boss or competitor. We might aswell make Michael O’ Leary Taoiseach. Now there’s an idea.
Seriously though, whatever cash he wants, whatever it takes to entice him back into the financial sector, we should pay him. It would be worth it for the entertainment value alone and we’ll need a lot of entertainment over the coming months to distract us from the economic misery in store.