MelbournePhilosopher

An unwinding fractal (fractal decompression)

2009-04-12T17:17:00.003+10:00

I was recently reading some disconnected scientific writings. A few ideas in them "connected" together in my mind. I'm not really qualified to comment on the science, but I thought I'd just share my idle speculations...

I was reading about the Second Law of Thermodynamics, being the gradual accretion of entropy within any system, being described as like an unwinding clockwork mechanism.

A little while previously, I had been reading about a scientific researcher who was examining the idea that quantum mechanics could potentially be rendered un-necessary by considering whether Newtonian mechanics could not be re-cast with a fractal geometry.

I took this to mean that instead of the traditional conception of a line (or surface), that line is, to use an informal term, "crinkly" at small scales. Fractals are very common in nature, and recursion is almost always elegant.

Then, my thoughts started wandering to two topics (a) the expansion of the universe and (b) the cosmological constant. What if we considered the idea of a fractal geometry more seriously, and imagined that not only may our surfaces be crinkly, they may be un-crinkling. Like ironing a shirt, blowing up a balloon, or stretching out elastic, perhaps spacetime itself is expanding as a result of becoming smoother.

What if the entire universe were infinitely crinkly at the beginning of the universe, like like a compressed spring? Then, as time has gone by, the rate of expansion has slowed as the spring has flattened out. Of course, I think the rate of expansion is currently thought to be increasing somewhat (while being significantly lower than t=0), which doesn't quite sit.

I'm not proposing, of course, that the 2nd Law is the actual same thing as what, for want of a better term, might be called "fractal decompression". It's the chain of reasoning which is connected in my mind, not the physical forces involved. However one contributor towards the degree of entropy is the expansion of the universe (expansion encourages uniformity by decreasing contrast).

In any case, I want again to profess my lack of mathematical and physical understanding of the issues. I'm purely exploring an analogical line of reasoning...

Cheers,
-MP

p.s. First Post in Two Years!

Volume 1, Edition 1 makes history

2006-11-21T22:05:00.000+11:00

The launch of 'The Python Papers'. The Python Papers

Welcome to The Python Papers. This journal, small though it is, represents the careful efforts of a small group of Python enthusiasts who are keen to form a better community in which developers may work.

As Editor-In-Chief, my role is manifold, but my goals are to improve the level of connectedness of Python developers, and in so doing improve my own developer experience.

The entire editorial board has put time into making this publication something which will hopefully lead to a buildup of momentum, fuelled by the enthusiastic involvement of others who find Python as exciting as we do.

The current issue contains one academic, peer-reviewed article, one industry article, and a list of events coming up in Melbourne, Australia. We would like to expand this list significantly. We offer our services in organising, collating and reviewing submitted content such that Python developers around the world may participate in the creation of something bigger than all of us, for the benefit of all of us. It may be a small journal, a little thing really, but all are welcome, and we look forward to getting to know our readers through the written word.

Please download the first edition, and consider both what it is and what it might be.

For those of you looking to publish an academic paper as a part of coursework or for interest's sake alone, we can offer a formal review process which will meet those guidelines while preserving the goals of freedom of information and community spirit.

Those who are using Python in their work may like to consider using the journal as a means of expressing successes or frustrations with either the language itself or specific applications. We may be able to offer code reviews and style guides, and would be happy to hear about and help propagate news of what is happening so that everyone can take an interest.

For those who would like a reliable source of information, The Python Papers presents a unique and current view into the state of Python at large.

To all of you, welcome!
Cheers,
-Tennessee (Editor-In-Chief)

Launch of new online journal

2006-11-02T15:25:00.000+11:00

Hi all,

Part of why I have been so silent is that I have been so busy preparing a new electronic journal on the Python programmming language. You can see this new publication at The Python Journal homepage on the publisher's site, or just straight to the first edition .

Yay!

Cheers,
-MP

Python Search Engine

2006-10-25T10:19:00.000+10:00

Google have just released the facility to make a custom search engine online, with the greatest of ease. I have just set one up, covering Python, Philosophy and investment. Currently it includes just seven emphasised website, and it would be great to expand this list.

MelbournePhilosopher's SE

Please comment here and I'll add sites accordingly. It would be great to rapidly build a useful resource with great Python sites emphasised for improved searching!

Cheers,
-T

* Regular review points -- consistent and regular examination of holdings and performance

2006-10-23T13:50:00.000+10:00

This is an important aspect. Note -- regular reviews do *not* mean regular trades. In fact, most reviews should probably not result in any trades at all. Reasoning about buying and selling should be independent of the reviews. The best time to buy and/or sell may not be on the day you do your review, but will come around whenever the market conditions are right. The purpose of the review isn't to trigger trades, but to keep abreast of the performance of your portfolio so that when the time is right, it is also recognised.

The easiest kind of regular review is the "buy-and-weed" approach. You plant a bunch of shares, and then weed out those which are not growing well, or perhaps which have already bloomed this season and are ready for rotation. Reviewing even a small portfolio can be very time-consuming to do. I find myself monitoring the share price of the companies I am invested in daily, and have also signed myself up to a news scanning service which emails me around 15 articles a day based on the share codes I have set up. Most of these I ignore -- I probably skim read about one article per day as the rest are minor updates and not of major interest.

Having some regular accounting of ones performance and decisions is well worth it. It removed the rose-coloured glasses of hindsight.

When starting out as I am, I found it useful to have a short checklist of perhaps 5 metrics to "grade" each share against. On that checklist could be:
* The share price on the day and at the time of last review
* A Good/Bad estimate of recent company news
* Whether you have considered buying or selling that share, and the price at the time of consideration
* What the share analysis (usually available from your e-broker) was on the day and at time of last review
* How you feel about the share

If it is difficult to do this, consider just a few shares at a time. Make sure you hit each one at least once every 3 months. This, in concert with a daily glance at the share prices, will help you notice changing market conditions.

Unfortunately, I don't know of much good software to help with this endeavour. The best tools are a workbook and writing stick. Compiling your own data in this way may seem tedious in the modern age, but there is no elegant computer solution that I know of. The exercise of manually creating the tables etc will also focus the attention in a way that using an automated application may not, so it's not all downsides.

After a while, see how each of your dot points looks with hindsight.

Cheers,
-MP

Money Management

2006-09-28T15:05:00.000+10:00

* Money management -- decisions that are semi-independent from the trade itself, relating to ideas about conserving capital, how much to invest, why to protect profits and when to stop losses

This stuff isn't quite the same thing as a trading strategy, although it has implications for it. Mostly, it's to do with risk, tax, income, profit, loss and accounting. It's also got a little to do with goals and achievement.

Let's suppose you've got a dead-cert trading strategy which makes you 10% a year without fail. Let's say.

Even with this in place, you're still going to have to know about money management. It's not usually the case that the trading strategy will demand that you are invested in the market 100%. In fact, it's much more likely that you'll have big lumps of cash sitting around waiting for opportunities or just gaining interest for lack of anything better.

For myself, I save X dollars per month, and I usually don't invest it all straight away. When should you invest? What constitutes too much exposure to the market, and what constitutes too little? How much are you willing to lose in the pursuit of profit? How much *research* are you willing to do.

Given your desires for profit, risk, how much work you are prepared to put in, what are you looking for in a trading system? Do you want to spend a day a week and an hour each other day reviewing your success and trading frequently? Or would you rather push the boulder down the slope and let it bounce where it may?

When do you get in? When do you get out? How much does your trading cost you in brokerage terms and in time management terms? Do you want to try taking out a loan product to gain leverage? How about other kinds of leverage?

These things can all be thought of independently of any particular approach to trading. This is a good thing, because it allows one to focus on a particular set of decisions in what is a very complex area...

Cheers,
-MP

Trading Systems Pt II

2006-09-21T10:33:00.000+10:00

This post *was* going to be an exploration of the first item on the list -- money management. However, I think I left something off that I should touch on first. Education.

I'm a bookish type. I've read about five investment books cover to cover, and feel like I'm finally beginning to understand a bit more about my horizon of ignorance. Yes, I've been trading too, but it's important to do both. The reality of trading re-enforces the theory, and the theory contributes to your understanding of the trading decisions you make.

I feel constantly frustrated by not having enough time to spend on this, however some time management is required. It would be easy to sink entirely into the world of trading, and possibly to only a little advantage. I will probably always feel like the tools at my disposal (including time) are insufficient to the task.

I believe that the only way to function properly in such a new, complex and bewildering environment is to combine doing, thinking and learning on an ongoing basis.

I will try to return to regular posting soon, and start at the stop of my list. :)

As a final note, I followed up the link sent to me by a reader which might be useful to others also. I have joined his website and will post to this blog if my impressions of the site change, but at first glance it looks genuine and useful. http://www.newsalerts.com.au/

Cheers,
-MP

Choosing a trading system

2006-08-21T13:17:00.000+10:00

I am currently considering what to use as the basis for an initial trading system. Until now, I have made decisions based on pieces of information and opinion without considering the wider context.

A trading system seems to involve a number of aspects
* Money management -- decisions that are semi-independent from the trade itself, relating to ideas about conserving capital, how much to invest, why to protect profits and when to stop losses
* Regular review points -- consistent and regular examination of holdings and performance
* Share selection -- choosing candidates for purchase
* Triggers -- conditions for buying and selling shares (other than stop loss)
* Goals -- explicit goals so that one has a reference point to judge against
* That Personal Touch -- recognition that you must make all these decisions your own
* An understanding of fundamentals and psychology

I will make further posts about each area as I consider them further, and will also post on the construction of a simple system, but one which is based on real numbers and whose components will be backed up by reasoning, statistics and argument.

Cheers,
-MP

What to do in a wobbly market?

2006-08-03T09:02:00.000+10:00

Do I get in? Do I get out? What does it all mean?

My investment books draw a big fat blank, are are mostly about making money when it's possible to spot a definite direction in prices. Right now though, they are just wobbling around. Can't sell short, no point in buying! What's there to be done?

One strategy is to hold and build up cash reserves. Another is to get out and get bank interest rates until an opportunity presents itself. It somewhat depends on how much is invested -- for small somes, too much trading will eat away at profits, so you need to be a bit more careful about executing a trade. If a trade is 5% of your stake, then you are in the game for Big Moves.

With this kind of trading, there are two options -- buy low and hold for a long time, or buy low and sell high. The trick is not to buy low and sell lower!

So, not many blog posts, since not many ideas.

Cheers,
-MP

Return from Overseas

2006-07-18T15:25:00.000+10:00

MelbournePhilosopher

I've been overseas for the past month, during which I paid some attention to the stockmarket but didn't really do much on the blog or self-education front.

However, the times have been volatile, so I've had a little education thrust upon me :). One thing which I was interested in was the amount of psychology present in the market. Let's say that that the price of a share is the sum of two components -- one a function of "value" and the other a function of "psychology". Let us suppose that the value of a share is drawn from the company's /fundamentals/ -- that is to say, the dividends paid, income earned, operating profit and other business metrics. Let us suppose that whatever is left after accounting for this is the result of psychology -- and let's just think of this as a term for any reaction to share price changes which is *not* justified by the fundamentals.

How big is the value component, and how big is the psychological component?

It seems to me like this question does have an answer. Let's suppose that there is some point in time (let's say, August last year) where the share price was dominated by the fundamental component, and there was not much psychology at play. The psychological component then can be measured if the share price changes while the fundamentals do not.

I don't, as of right now, have a method for determining actual numbers for these components. However, I find it a useful distinction nonetheless. One sees the interplay most clearly during periods of quiet, where there is no news on the company in question, nor any market-wide shock, yet the share price changes. Can this change be attributed to anything other than psychology?

Looking at ENG over a year, the price climbed quickly from 8c to 48c, on the strength of both its fundamentals and general market optimism (i.e. in line with market-general psychology). Recently, it fell to around 25c, without the fundamentals having changed significantly. (In fact it could be argued that they improved). Presumably, then, at 48c there was about (say) 22c of fundamental value, and about 26c of psychological value. That is to say, about half.

I will attempt to think further on this to work out if some better analysis could be achieved. However, it is useful to me as it helps me crystallise my thoughts on /how much importance/ to place on techniques of fundamental analysis vs techniques of chart/technical/psychological analysis.

All things to wonder about. Feedback welcome -- today's post is very speculative.

Cheers,
-MP

Statistics, The Funds, Booms and Busts

2006-06-14T10:20:00.000+10:00

Firstly: I recently had a comment about high-performing funds.

The short answer: some people get lucky. Nobody hears about the underperforming funds. If you take a consistent definition of "a fund" -- and track them over time without changing it -- and do a real average, then you might get a number you can believe. What's more likely is that some statistically unwise reporter has found 5 or 10 funds which have all been profitable, averaged their results, and gotten an above-average return.

Simple statistics prepared by anyone other than an expert, with anything less than a full understanding of the statistical methods used to arrive at them, do not carry enough meaning to do be certain about their implications.

It's equally possible, for example, that if you take the last three boom years, the average fund return *was* around 17% -- just as it likely was for many individual highly leveraged traders. However, if you extend your period out to the long term (say 15 years) to incorporate some crash periods, the figures will look less rosy.

By all means, consider the value of a fund, but don't place infinite faith in them.

The ASX has recently had its single biggest drop since S11, and has been falling steadily for several days. Yet, considered over only a 1-year period, returns are still in excess of the 10% rule-of-thumb figure mentioned earlier. While there has been a recent plunge, investors are still experiencing long-term rewards. The intensity of the current fall is high, but its duration has been short, and has not had a terrible impact considered over the sufficiently long term. The longer the period of time under consideration, the lesser the impact of extreme events if they can be survived.

To speculate, one reason for the size of the current fall might be that individuals are taking profits. Relatively few people, perhaps, have bought shares at recent high prices, while relatively more, perhaps, are realising 25% profits from purchases made several years ago. Considered against yesterday's prices, there has been a big fall, but many traders will be considering not yesterday's price, but their purchase price. Since traders may own shares for many years, medium-term price history is highly relevant.

While in some senses this seems ridiculous (why would anyone not want to sell at the high, and not be dismayed by the drop), it also makes sense that individuals will be making decisions against profit targets, trading overheads and their own particular strategies. It seems like the better risk to lock in a 25% profit than hope for a return to previously high values to gain 35%. Risk-averse traders would prefer to protect their returns.

Cheers,
-MP
(This is not investment advice. I'm just this guy, you know?)

Free ASX OHLCV end-of-day data

2006-06-08T14:42:00.000+10:00

http://www.ipo-australia.com/

Has free pricing data available for download. Not quite the realtime tick-data I'd ideally like, but not bad for the price!

Cheers,
-MP

Quality of Information

2006-06-08T13:30:00.000+10:00

One of the things which I have found challenging is sorting through the abundance of information and misinformation that is available.

Let me state from the outset -- I do not subscribe to any form of supernatural intervention in investing. As far as I am concerned, it is a strictly human affair.

That cuts out a frightening amount of the available literature at the get-go. What remains breaks up into "Stuff Based on 1950s Research", "Fluffy Contentless Books for Beginners", "Ludicrously Complex Books", "Sensible Tips" and "Miscellaneous".

What's surprising to me is the lack of anything to bridge the gap between sensible tips and a useable guide to investing.

I think I have identified the reason -- investors are not hackers. If investors were hackers, every Joe Soap would have published information on the web for criticism and shared knowledge. There would be a lot of crap, but there would at least exist *some* more complete documents describing how to do that trading thing.

This is corroborated by the lack of open-source software for trading -- or software which even *runs* on linux. Trading has not yet been hacked.

Partly, this must be because hackers don't find trading interesting. However, I'm surprised, because at some level the information is readily available if you can put the time in to look for it, and because it involves improving a system.

Anyway, this blog started being about quality of information. I really, really recommend spending a lot of *effort* and not a lot of *money* on learning about shares. Very few books will directly or completely address your needs.

Over the coming posts, I will attempt to describe some of the better sources of information which I find. Book reviews are one way in which this will happen, but I will also attempt to review ideas, websites and organisations along the way. This lends itself to wikification, but I don't have the time right now.

In the meantime, I'm starting with baby steps. I'm risking amounts of money that I can afford to lose, and spending a lot of time at the research level.

(This is not investment advice. I'm just this guy, you know?)

Cheers,
-MP

Beating 10%

2006-06-05T15:46:00.000+10:00

MelbournePhilosopher

Investing in the sharemarket is a game of trying to beat 10%. Historically, this has been the long-term return on Australian share investments. Bearish markets, bullish ones, recessions, depressions booms and busts simply vanish into the statistics over a long enough timescale. If you use a risk-minimisation strategy, and stick it out for long enough, you could reasonably expect a 10% return. (Source : http://www.asx.com.au/investor/pdf/getting_started_in_shares.pdf -- see the graph of expected returns). This is a compounding figure, so your absolute gains increase over time as you get interest-on-the-interest from previous years.

So, are you feeling lucky?

If you just buy one share, you're at the other end of the spectrum. Your money will experience far greater variance over time, as a single company is far more exposed to both danger and opportunity than the market as a whole.

Corrolory: If you buy a specific company, you are in fact using your money to wager that the returns will be greater than 10%. You are gambling with your money, risking a worse return in order to gain a better one.

If you don't have any reason to think a company will outperform the average significantly, don't buy it. If you want to get better than a 10% return, do a lot of research first.

Another way of thinking of this is in terms of the Red Queen problem. The Red Queen from Alice in Wonderland is forced to run as fast as she can just to stay in the same spot. The sharemarket is the same -- as soon as you're in, you're in a marathon race where in order to stay with the crowd you have to run. If you pace yourself, you should be able to finish somewhere in the middle. The pack is running at an average of 10% p.a. over the long term.

Things are, of course, a lot more complicated than this. There is more than one "rate" which you should be trying to beat. One is inflation, for example. If you are making less that inflation, then you really *are* going backwards as your money loses buying power. If you are making 6%, you are merely less ahead. However, it is the 10% rate against which one should primarily be assessing performance.

The basic reason for this is that there exist good strategies which make the 10% rate a very plausible target for any investor.

All share purchases are either attempts to reduce risk and thus achieve the 10% average, or to increase risk and beat the 10% average.

Cheers,
-MP

(This is not financial advice. I'm just this guy, you know?)

Book Review -- Introducing the Australian Stockmarket

2006-05-31T09:03:00.000+10:00

Introducing the Australian Stockmarket
Adam Steen and Keith Kendall
Wrightbooks

Rating : 5*
------------------

This book was clearly the pick of the bunch for an intelligent introduction to the ASX, and trading in general. I say intelligent, because it doesn't bamboozle you with terminology, but introduces things clearly, describing their role in share trading, their history and their meaning. The bulk of the common ASX traded products are covered, and so is the terminology.

The book is split into two sections -- "Shares and the ASX" and "Analysing the ASX". The first part describes the ASX, what a share is, how they may be bought and sold, the sectors and indices of the ASX, leverage and derivitive products, tax, and law. This gives an understanding of how a share is tied to a real company, what a sharemarket is, and what trading comprises.

The second section begins to give an insight into the information surrounding trading decisions. It covers fundamental analysis, financial statements, macroeconomic issues, technical analysis, charting tools and a summary of the usefullness of the various sources of information.

While not enough to formulate a trading system in its own right, it is a useful introduction to what may be done, how, and a little of why. An excellent basis for further learning.

Cheers,
-MP

Financial Review Review

2006-05-30T15:54:00.000+10:00

I thought I'd include a segment about once a week based on my reactions to the day's publication of the Australian Financial Review. Today, the articles which caught my attention were:

* China heading for a tight spot in iron ore game. This article discusses the possibility of China being unable to secure fixed-price iron ore supply. While many of China's competitors have secured fixed prices, the market remains open to manipulation. Secured fixed prices are at a discount of around 35% to the current 'spot' or market prices. Impacts for major suppliers are obvious.

* Netting sales. This article discusses the potentially undervalued company Clean Seas Tuna. They have established a fishery and are experiencing a strong demand for their stock. The new agriculture?

* ASX backflip on index sparks a fear of foreigners. This article is talking down the benefits of listing more foreign companies on the ASX, but that would seem to me to be a positive step. The downside is said to be that the competition for capital would harm capital raising by Australian companies. However, such protectionist attitudes seem to be a bit 1950s. I would have thought that having a more diverse market could only advantage the buyer, and having global competition would allow the market to more strongly direct specialisation.

Cheers,
-MP
(This is not financial advice. I'm just this guy, you know?)

ASX Expo and Seminar Program

2006-05-29T13:56:00.000+10:00

First post with investment content... yay.

I've just registered for http://www.tradersexpo.com.au/traders&investors/index.html. I'm going to Loise Bedford's "share trading 101" and another called "Trading System Design" by Christopher Tate. At other times, I will be attending the ASX sponsored seminars and/or blogging. Look forward to full coverage here!

Cheers,
-MP

Repurposing this Blog

2006-05-29T13:21:00.000+10:00

MelbournePhilosopher

I'm giving serious thought to re-purposing this blog. I have now completed my Diploma of Philosophy, and my involvement with the Australian philosophy scene has become one of contented observer rather than trying to stimulate online involvement with philosophy.

Personally, my interests have swung around more to investing and software development. I'm a programmer by trade, and I'm also currently trying to learn about share trading and building wealth. I still maintain a healthy interest in philosophy, but I no longer feel the need to add content to the blogosphere on the topic.

As such, I am going to convert this blog to an investment blog. It will cover my thoughts on the Australian sharemarket, cover topics as I learn them and as such hopefully provide a learner's view of investment, which will naturally become increasingly sophisticated moving forward.

I will not attempt to cover what I have already learned in order, but my reading list has been:

* Benoit Mandelbrot
* Daryl Guppy
* Much email contact with more experienced friends
* Trading shares the ASX way and other similar books.

I will start with a review of each book I have read, to recap and summarise the salient aspects.

Thanks for all your attention over the years. I have enjoyed being a philosophical blogger and appreciated each and every comment left on this site. Perhaps some of you will also be interested in coming on my journey of investment.

I remain,
-MP

Ethical Investing

2006-02-28T10:09:00.000+11:00

I had a thought about ethical investing. Instead of investing in ethical companies, perhaps one could turn over ones proxy votes to an ethical organisation, who would use this conferred power to try to bring about more ethical behaviours within existing companies.

Big companies often divide and conquer -- large share blocks owned by principal stakeholders rule the day, while smaller investors are divided and unheard. Unifying minority opinions through an ethical proxy could improve their power greatly.

Cheers,
-MP

Tony Abbott ... conservative, pro-life, and unexpectedly reasonable interfaith ...

2006-02-27T10:13:00.000+11:00

I'm just going to quote.

"It can be a shock to find calls for sharia law in Australian places of worship.

"Still, it would be a big mistake to dismiss this as 'un-Australian' rather than to begin the kind of engagement that eventually made Christianity less bloody.

"Indeed, talking to the more hardline Muslims, rather than ostracising them or shouting them down, could be one of the greatest services Australia can render to the wider world.

"Why shouldn't the Muslim version of the Enlightenment and an Islamic doctrine of the separation of church and state be fostered in Australia? Especially as the task is so urgent."

I couldn't have said it better myself.

Cheers,
-MP

Attention

2006-02-01T11:37:00.000+11:00

It has come to my attention that "Attention" is currently being overloaded with a new meaning. One of my sometimes-readers, Alex Barnett, also works in software and is interested in this thing he calls Attention.

Well, it's an interesting concept. Attention according to wikipedia boilds it down to concentration on one thing, like listening to a single conversation at a cocktail party.

Every day, we are selective about what we pay attention to -- usually this is predominantly decided by our physical location. We see what is in front of us, we hear what is near us, we taste what we eat. At work we pay attention to people who contact us, or people from whom we need something.

Our attention is mostly directed by (1) our physical surroundings, (2) our current goals, desires and intentions, and (3) manifestations of things into (1) and (2). By manifestations, I mean for example an arriving email, telephone call, etc. There is attention-pull and attention-push.

When our goals and desires take up all our time, or while our physical surroundings are very interesting, or there are many manifestations, our attention gets mostly used up. Sometimes, however, we realise that manifestations are preventing us from pursuing our goals, desires and intentions, or that our physical surroundings are also affecting them.

We may then be said to have a higher-level goal to modify have such surroundings and manifestations that best enable us to fulfil our goals, desires and intentions.

Alex, when discussing attention, is primarily concerned with manifestations. How do we improve their quality? How can we more quickly locate information on the web? How can we get better news, more interesting emails, etc? Can technology help us achieve these aims?

He lists a number of sources of information which he believes could /inform/ our beliefs about what information sources are best to pay attention to. He includes: Tag clouds, wishlists, reading lists, book catalogs, blogrolls, RSS / OPML lists, contacts, social networks and buddy lists, photo collections, photostreams, playlists, music collections, bookmarks, blogs, game lists, community memberships, calendar entries, video collections and lists, favourite places and social guides and subscription lists.

All of these things are, in effect, a kind of /expression of preference/. How is it that we can improve the quality of manifestations based on our preferences?

Cheers,
-T

Court to decide if Jesus existed

2006-01-25T10:43:00.000+11:00

Court to decide if Jesus existed

Well, here's a story to follow. While philosophers talk about standards of proof, there's no more practical standard of proof than the acceptance of a court of law.

While MP can see no outcome other than a compromise coming from this, it certainly is interesting to see it appearing in a non-U.S. court.

Cheers,
-MP

Philosophy on iTunes

2006-01-24T16:20:00.000+11:00

Well, philosophy is coming into the digital age. Sure, I was clamouring for this years ago, but I'm not about to complain now that quality content is now being delivered properly.

What am I yammering about? e-Philosophy -- lectures and other rich content available on the internet for free exchange. My (defunct) website, MelbournePhilosophy, had some apologetic nods towards a digital database, but it never lived up to my ideals.

Firstly, here is a story about the philosophy lecture series "Introduction to Logic" being available via iTunes.

Secondly, here is the Stanford University iTunes server, with free academic content. Many of the offerings here seem to be "opinion pieces", but that is no smear. In fact, it's wonderful (to me) seeing such freedom of information.

Hopefully, as more and more philosophy gets recorded digitally, it will be similarly shared.

Cheers,
-MP

Python XML implementation flaw -- whitespace and wholeText

2006-01-20T16:08:00.000+11:00

MelbournePhilosopher

I place this non-philosophical note into the blogosphere in the hope that Google will pick it up and do society some good.

If you are useing the xml.dom.minidom implementation, and are dealing with minidom.Text nodes, the following stupid behaviour occurs:

When you call node.replaceWholeText in order to, well, replace the text contained inside the node, don't try to put an empty string in. I was formatting the text content of nodes, and was using strip() to remove whitespace from around the edges. Unfortunately, calling strip() on a whitespace string results in the empty string.

The practical effect was major breakage. With no errors, warnings, or readily apparent cause, the entire XML document became corrupted. Not only corrupted, but empty. My entire XML document was Fubar. Fortunately, this was version 0, so I wasn't saving my changes back to disk, so I didn't lose any information permanently, but I lost a full day (arrive 10am, swear constantly, find solution at 4pm) on this stupid, undocumented, and brain-bending behaviour.

My dummy is spat.

Cheers,
-MP

The meaning of trust

2006-01-20T14:31:00.000+11:00

It occurs to me that there are two ways to think about trust. Let's suppose that X is some person or system whom you are considering trusting. They might be a wife, father, a legal process, journalists or some other person or group.

I think there are two ways to approach this. The first is to understand their character -- their tendencies and your expectations relating to those. I might trust X once I understand their character, even if I believe they will in many ways undermine my own goals. For example, one might learn to trust an enemy to behave in a certain way once you understand their character.

On the other hand, one might consider trust to be submitting ones goal system to that of another. For example, I might trust that my partner is doing the best thing even though their actions are in contradiction with my own goals -- my own estimation of what the best thing is.

I would say I primarily involve myself with the first kind of trust -- relying on people to act as I expect. I trust some of my work colleagues do some kinds of tasks, but not others. I regard this kind of trust to be of a different character to the second.

However, with people that I love, I would say I involve a mixture of trusts. I submit my goal systems to those of (for example) my partner, my parents and my much-loved friends.

In a sense it's the difference between a tool and team-mate. I would say these are two distinct kinds of trust, which do not bleed into eachother. To some extent, I regard my loved ones as tools also.

Some of them are good at responding to emails, some are bad. It would be silly for me to expect some of them to organise an important event, etc. On the other hand, some are excellent. Insofar as I am trying to achieve particular goals, I must consider them as tools.

On the other hand, I also regard them as team-mates. This is to say that I trust not only their behaviours, but their goals.

I'm not sure that I've captured the thought precisely, but hopefully I've gotten the nub of it.

Cheers,
-MP