Jasen Betts <usenet@revmaps.no-ip.org> wrote in news:sspn19$t96$1@gonzo.revmaps.no-ip.org:> On 2022-01-25, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com > <jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com> wrote: >> >> https://www.cnbc.com/2022/01/25/the-federal-reserve-is-likely-to-s >> ignal-a-march-rate-hike.html >> >> We've seen this pattern for hundreds of years, but nobody adds >> much damping or lead comp to the loop. Quite the contrary. > > many think this is intentional. >Every move they make is. Big business does not want the change which is coming. They are going to try to squeeze everything. Progress in the US is stifled by dopes like Mitch McConnell and the republicans, because somewhere along the way they decided that getting rid of previous adminstration progress was a good move. Mitch let hundreds of bills sit on his desk for YEARS. We have a boatload of oath ignoring bastards whom should all be sitting in cells scratching their heads right now, wondering why they made such stupid choices, and Mitch to blame for it..
bang-bang control loop
Started by ●January 25, 2022
Reply by ●January 25, 20222022-01-25
Reply by ●January 25, 20222022-01-25
Joe Gwinn <joegwinn@comcast.net> wrote in news:ljs0vg1sueskc6clq8ti9mmj13li3m8mns@4ax.com:> On Tue, 25 Jan 2022 13:44:54 -0800, John Larkin > <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote: > >>On Tue, 25 Jan 2022 16:19:04 -0500, bitrex <user@example.net> >>wrote: >> >>>On 1/25/2022 12:33 PM, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote: >>>> >>>> https://www.cnbc.com/2022/01/25/the-federal-reserve-is-likely-to >>>> -signal-a-march-rate-hike.html >>>> >>>> We've seen this pattern for hundreds of years, but nobody adds >>>> much damping or lead comp to the loop. Quite the contrary. >>> >>> >>>Ever done if voltage too high: duty cycle = 20%, if voltage too >>>low: duty cycle = 80% on a boost topology? >> >>I've done something like that, a boost converter where the control >>element is a schmitt trigger gate. Hysteretic boost. Maybe I can >>find the schematic. >> >> >>> >>>If the load is like a Nixie tube or something seems to work >>>alright. Stand by for my economy = Nixie tube formal presentation >>> >>> >> >>It would show on the nixie if the voltage jumped around >>erratically about 2:1. >> >>I wonder if economists have something like Spice to play with. >>When I took economics there was no mention of time-domain effects, >>leads and lags and loops, or of nonlinearities. But those were >>undergrad courses. > > Me too. Econ does use systems of ODEs, but solve for > steady-state. The key in Econ is to find a mathematically simple > way to plausibly capture human behavior. It kinda works, so long > as one does not push one's luck. > > A key assumption is that the various economic actors being modeled > are statistically independent, which is true until it isn't - like > in a bubble and/or crash, when everybody tries to do the same > thing. > > In the Financial world, Economists are not listened to. > > Joe Gwinn >Like Al Pacino said "The Big Bang Threw us all out here, and the Big Slam is gonna pull us all right back in." <https://youtu.be/UneS2Uwc6xw?t=54> Or as Dr. Frederick Frankenstein said "Entropy, entropy, no escaping that for we!" We are all having a 'Nachtmere'. Just ask Teri Garr. Nice Knockers! <https://youtu.be/P0WapDCR9fg?t=7>
Reply by ●January 25, 20222022-01-25
On Tue, 25 Jan 2022 17:43:41 -0500, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:>On 1/25/2022 5:09 PM, Joe Gwinn wrote: >> On Tue, 25 Jan 2022 13:44:54 -0800, John Larkin >> <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote: >> >>> On Tue, 25 Jan 2022 16:19:04 -0500, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote: >>> >>>> On 1/25/2022 12:33 PM, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote: >>>>> >>>>> https://www.cnbc.com/2022/01/25/the-federal-reserve-is-likely-to-signal-a-march-rate-hike.html >>>>> >>>>> We've seen this pattern for hundreds of years, but nobody adds much >>>>> damping or lead comp to the loop. Quite the contrary. >>>> >>>> >>>> Ever done if voltage too high: duty cycle = 20%, if voltage too low: >>>> duty cycle = 80% on a boost topology? >>> >>> I've done something like that, a boost converter where the control >>> element is a schmitt trigger gate. Hysteretic boost. Maybe I can find >>> the schematic. >>> >>> >>>> >>>> If the load is like a Nixie tube or something seems to work alright. >>>> Stand by for my economy = Nixie tube formal presentation >>>> >>>> >>> >>> It would show on the nixie if the voltage jumped around erratically >>> about 2:1. >>> >>> I wonder if economists have something like Spice to play with. When I >>> took economics there was no mention of time-domain effects, leads and >>> lags and loops, or of nonlinearities. But those were undergrad >>> courses. >> >> Me too. Econ does use systems of ODEs, but solve for steady-state. >> The key in Econ is to find a mathematically simple way to plausibly >> capture human behavior. It kinda works, so long as one does not push >> one's luck. >> >> A key assumption is that the various economic actors being modeled are >> statistically independent, which is true until it isn't - like in a >> bubble and/or crash, when everybody tries to do the same thing. >> >> In the Financial world, Economists are not listened to. >> >> Joe Gwinn > >True facts, I have an acquaintance who's a PhD academic macroeconomist.They are all macroeconomists. That's glamorous and powerful. Of course, macroeconomics is just the sum of all the microeconomics. -- If a man will begin with certainties, he shall end with doubts, but if he will be content to begin with doubts he shall end in certainties. Francis Bacon
Reply by ●January 25, 20222022-01-25
On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 4:33:13 AM UTC+11, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:> https://www.cnbc.com/2022/01/25/the-federal-reserve-is-likely-to-signal-a-march-rate-hike.html > > We've seen this pattern for hundreds of years, but nobody adds much > damping or lead comp to the loop. Quite the contrary.Or none that John Larkin can understand. The real economy is nonlinear and not all that mathematically tractable - as John Maynard Keynes pointed out in the 1930's and Dan Kahneman https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Kahneman has explained in more detail, more recently, for which he was awarded the 2002 Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences John's friend James Arthur prefers the Monetarist's mathematically tractable models of the economy, even though they are unrealistic. Naomi Klein - in "Shock Doctrine" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Shock_Doctrine suggests that this a deliberate choice - bad theory makes for bad control, and people with lots of money do well out of picking up the pieces after the economy has crashed. -- Bill Sloman, Sydney
Reply by ●January 26, 20222022-01-26
On 26/01/22 01:02, Anthony William Sloman wrote:> On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 4:33:13 AM UTC+11, > jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote: >> https://www.cnbc.com/2022/01/25/the-federal-reserve-is-likely-to-signal-a-march-rate-hike.html >> >> >>We've seen this pattern for hundreds of years, but nobody adds much>> damping or lead comp to the loop. Quite the contrary. > > Or none that John Larkin can understand. > > The real economy is nonlinear and not all that mathematically tractable - as > John Maynard Keynes pointed out in the 1930's and Dan Kahneman > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Kahneman > > has explained in more detail, more recently, for which he was awarded the > 2002 Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences > > John's friend James Arthur prefers the Monetarist's mathematically tractable > models of the economy, even though they are unrealistic. > > Naomi Klein - in "Shock Doctrine" > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Shock_Doctrine > > suggests that this a deliberate choice - bad theory makes for bad control, > and people with lots of money do well out of picking up the pieces after the > economy has crashed."Disaster capitalism" is a pain at whatever scale it occurs. The deregulation of the banks under Clinton and Blair lead to short-term release of cash and therefore a feeling of well being which delights politicians. But it also set the scene for the 2008 crash. I remember being somewhat uneasy that banks were allowed to lend 8 times the assets they held. I was horrified to find that limit had been removed, and that some were lending ridiculous amounts, e.g. Northern Crock 42(!) times.
Reply by ●January 26, 20222022-01-26
On Tue, 25 Jan 2022 09:33:02 -0800, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:> >https://www.cnbc.com/2022/01/25/the-federal-reserve-is-likely-to-signal-a-march-rate-hike.html > >We've seen this pattern for hundreds of years, but nobody adds much >damping or lead comp to the loop. Quite the contrary.Cryptos add a nice (ie nasty) destabilizer to the system. https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/crypto-collapse-erases-more-than-1-trillion-in-wealth-forcing-a-reckoning-for-everyday-investors/ar-AAT8lXj The Fed deliberately zeroed interest rates and pushed savings and productive investment into the fantasy stock market. A return to sane policy risks being justly blamed for a historic crash. They are riding the tiger's back. Even rumors about possible Fed decisions swing trillions in stock value. That is macroeconomic power madness. That's insane. -- I yam what I yam - Popeye
Reply by ●January 26, 20222022-01-26
On Wed, 26 Jan 2022 08:24:03 +0000, Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:>On 26/01/22 01:02, Anthony William Sloman wrote: >> On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 4:33:13 AM UTC+11, >> jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote: >>> https://www.cnbc.com/2022/01/25/the-federal-reserve-is-likely-to-signal-a-march-rate-hike.html >>> >>> >>> >We've seen this pattern for hundreds of years, but nobody adds much >>> damping or lead comp to the loop. Quite the contrary. >> >> Or none that John Larkin can understand. >> >> The real economy is nonlinear and not all that mathematically tractable - as >> John Maynard Keynes pointed out in the 1930's and Dan Kahneman >> >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Kahneman >> >> has explained in more detail, more recently, for which he was awarded the >> 2002 Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences >> >> John's friend James Arthur prefers the Monetarist's mathematically tractable >> models of the economy, even though they are unrealistic. >> >> Naomi Klein - in "Shock Doctrine" >> >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Shock_Doctrine >> >> suggests that this a deliberate choice - bad theory makes for bad control, >> and people with lots of money do well out of picking up the pieces after the >> economy has crashed. > >"Disaster capitalism" is a pain at whatever scale it occurs.What's worse is disaster socialism; that asserts single-player control... lacks "diversity."> >The deregulation of the banks under Clinton and Blair lead to >short-term release of cash and therefore a feeling of well >being which delights politicians. But it also set the scene >for the 2008 crash. > >I remember being somewhat uneasy that banks were allowed to >lend 8 times the assets they held. I was horrified to find that >limit had been removed, and that some were lending ridiculous >amounts, e.g. Northern Crock 42(!) times.Banks became yet another gambler in the already crowded casinos. -- If a man will begin with certainties, he shall end with doubts, but if he will be content to begin with doubts he shall end in certainties. Francis Bacon
Reply by ●January 26, 20222022-01-26
On Thursday, January 27, 2022 at 5:51:49 AM UTC+11, John Larkin wrote:> On Wed, 26 Jan 2022 08:24:03 +0000, Tom Gardner <spam...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote: > >On 26/01/22 01:02, Anthony William Sloman wrote: > >> On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 4:33:13 AM UTC+11, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:> >We've seen this pattern for hundreds of years, but nobody adds much > >>> damping or lead comp to the loop. Quite the contrary. > >> > >> Or none that John Larkin can understand. > >> > >> The real economy is nonlinear and not all that mathematically tractable - as > >> John Maynard Keynes pointed out in the 1930's and Dan Kahneman > >> > >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Kahneman > >> > >> has explained in more detail, more recently, for which he was awarded the > >> 2002 Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences > >> > >> John's friend James Arthur prefers the Monetarist's mathematically tractable > >> models of the economy, even though they are unrealistic. > >> > >> Naomi Klein - in "Shock Doctrine" > >> > >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Shock_Doctrine > >> > >> suggests that this a deliberate choice - bad theory makes for bad control, > >> and people with lots of money do well out of picking up the pieces after the > >> economy has crashed. > > > >"Disaster capitalism" is a pain at whatever scale it occurs. > > What's worse is disaster socialism; that asserts single-player control... lacks "diversity."Like all American right-wingers, John Larkin confuses communism with socialism. Karl Marx got thrown out of the international socialist movement in 1871 because his enthusiasm for "the leading role of the party" was seem as undemocratic, and likely to lead to tyranny, as indeed it did. China and Russia have exactly the same problem as the US - a small minority run the country for their own advantage. Genuinely socialist countries, like most of the northern European countries are much more diverse, have less economic inequality, and offer a better standard of living for most of the population. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_wealth_per_adult The US is at 26 with $79.274. China is at 43 with $24,067, and Russia is at 91 with $5,431 . Australia is a number 2 with $238,072 - we aren't famously socialist, but we do have universal health care and long history of trade union activism. -- Bill Sloman, Sydney
Reply by ●January 27, 20222022-01-27
On 1/26/2022 1:51 PM, John Larkin wrote:> On Wed, 26 Jan 2022 08:24:03 +0000, Tom Gardner > <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote: > >> On 26/01/22 01:02, Anthony William Sloman wrote: >>> On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 4:33:13 AM UTC+11, >>> jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote: >>>> https://www.cnbc.com/2022/01/25/the-federal-reserve-is-likely-to-signal-a-march-rate-hike.html >>>> >>>> >>>> >> We've seen this pattern for hundreds of years, but nobody adds much >>>> damping or lead comp to the loop. Quite the contrary. >>> >>> Or none that John Larkin can understand. >>> >>> The real economy is nonlinear and not all that mathematically tractable - as >>> John Maynard Keynes pointed out in the 1930's and Dan Kahneman >>> >>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Kahneman >>> >>> has explained in more detail, more recently, for which he was awarded the >>> 2002 Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences >>> >>> John's friend James Arthur prefers the Monetarist's mathematically tractable >>> models of the economy, even though they are unrealistic. >>> >>> Naomi Klein - in "Shock Doctrine" >>> >>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Shock_Doctrine >>> >>> suggests that this a deliberate choice - bad theory makes for bad control, >>> and people with lots of money do well out of picking up the pieces after the >>> economy has crashed. >> >> "Disaster capitalism" is a pain at whatever scale it occurs. > > What's worse is disaster socialism; that asserts single-player > control... lacks "diversity."Hey remember that time Richard Nixon was obviously enjoying shaking hands and chatting it up with the supreme leader of the second-most powerful communist country in the world at the time, and meanwhile the US was bombing one of the poorest countries on the planet with B-52s and thousands of US soldiers were being killed and maimed because if we didn't, y'know, communism would get too powerful and have undue influence on the so-called "free world"? Lot of sense that made from an economic perspective, much less any other. If the Vietnam war ever had any sense it sure never made a lick of sense after 1972, and yet the US kept at it for another three years...>> The deregulation of the banks under Clinton and Blair lead to >> short-term release of cash and therefore a feeling of well >> being which delights politicians. But it also set the scene >> for the 2008 crash. >> >> I remember being somewhat uneasy that banks were allowed to >> lend 8 times the assets they held. I was horrified to find that >> limit had been removed, and that some were lending ridiculous >> amounts, e.g. Northern Crock 42(!) times. > > Banks became yet another gambler in the already crowded casinos. >
Reply by ●January 27, 20222022-01-27
On Thursday, January 27, 2022 at 2:29:00 AM UTC-4, bitrex wrote:> On 1/26/2022 1:51 PM, John Larkin wrote: > > On Wed, 26 Jan 2022 08:24:03 +0000, Tom Gardner > > <spam...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote: > > > >> On 26/01/22 01:02, Anthony William Sloman wrote: > >>> On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 4:33:13 AM UTC+11, > >>> jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote: > >>>> https://www.cnbc.com/2022/01/25/the-federal-reserve-is-likely-to-signal-a-march-rate-hike.html > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >> We've seen this pattern for hundreds of years, but nobody adds much > >>>> damping or lead comp to the loop. Quite the contrary. > >>> > >>> Or none that John Larkin can understand. > >>> > >>> The real economy is nonlinear and not all that mathematically tractable - as > >>> John Maynard Keynes pointed out in the 1930's and Dan Kahneman > >>> > >>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Kahneman > >>> > >>> has explained in more detail, more recently, for which he was awarded the > >>> 2002 Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences > >>> > >>> John's friend James Arthur prefers the Monetarist's mathematically tractable > >>> models of the economy, even though they are unrealistic. > >>> > >>> Naomi Klein - in "Shock Doctrine" > >>> > >>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Shock_Doctrine > >>> > >>> suggests that this a deliberate choice - bad theory makes for bad control, > >>> and people with lots of money do well out of picking up the pieces after the > >>> economy has crashed. > >> > >> "Disaster capitalism" is a pain at whatever scale it occurs. > > > > What's worse is disaster socialism; that asserts single-player > > control... lacks "diversity." > Hey remember that time Richard Nixon was obviously enjoying shaking > hands and chatting it up with the supreme leader of the second-most > powerful communist country in the world at the time, and meanwhile the > US was bombing one of the poorest countries on the planet with B-52s and > thousands of US soldiers were being killed and maimed because if we > didn't, y'know, communism would get too powerful and have undue > influence on the so-called "free world"? > > Lot of sense that made from an economic perspective, much less any > other. If the Vietnam war ever had any sense it sure never made a lick > of sense after 1972, and yet the US kept at it for another three years...Yeah, what's your point? Are you thinking bang-bang control is a military term? -- Rick C. + Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging + Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
