Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Uh,

On the one hand, it's simply false that you need a profitable counter-strategy to disprove the efficient market hypothesis.

On the other hand, Nichaulus Taleb, among others, did extremely well and was quite open about going against "efficient markets".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nassim_Nicholas_Taleb

Uh, and a huge number of people knew housing was over-valued. If you don't know the turning point in a market, knowing the market isn't efficient doesn't tell your next move - if the markets keep being inefficient, you don't make anything. Taleb made money but far more people made far more money - by finding the bigger sucker.

Edit: Also, the particular mechanisms of the last crisis, where synthetic bonds exploded via their unrealistic assumptions and "fair value accounting" had to be suspended, were a rather specific shot against the EMH.



Ok, how can you disprove EMH without a profitable strategy? I'm aware of a few mathematical techniques for proving something exists without actually building it (probabilistic methods, baire category theorem), I can't see how any of them would apply.

Also, the statement that "X will go down but I don't know when" isn't really a prediction - it's more of a truism.


No,

Your argument is more like a quack who prescribes magnetics for cancer.

When someone objects to the claim, quack say "well, prove your claim by showing you can heal the patient right now".

Taleb, Mandlebrot and a number of others have gone over the fallacious quality of EMH claims and it's been over a number of thread here, I don't have more time it now.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: