Antidote du Jour 8/5/08 Posted on August 4, 2008 by Yves Smith Post navigation ← Year of Lending Dangerously Bernanke facing revolt over inflation? → Subscribe to Post Comments 11 comments Anonymous August 4, 2008 at 11:37 pm Waiting patiently for your next post. doc holiday August 5, 2008 at 12:55 am I see a playful and restless society exhausted from a credit binge — linked to a tsunami of fraudulent economic activity that was just an easy and simple click away. I also see a game of cat and mouse in a global casino that is fueled by attention deficit zombies that shop until they drop, burning out in every sense — burning out across the financial spectrum — burning out like reckless and drunken slobs that have literally and figuratively no self control, playing the part of a weak and kitten-like pawn who is swept along in a pied-piper illusion of capitalism that is bankrupt. Amen and good evening! badanov August 5, 2008 at 6:09 am I see a kewt kitteh napping after playing with a computer mouse… Or am I reading too much into that? doc holiday August 5, 2008 at 10:25 am Kitty represents the inexperience of youth and the mouse represents the connection to data mining and cognitive power, i.e, the power to reason. The mouse, connected to an old outdated computer is symbolic in terms of youth being asleep and unable to think or to connect to complicated and abstract thinking. The kitties in society today use and thus abuse the logic of supercomputing power as being just a blackbox machine as a brat-like babysitter playtoy. This ubiquitous toy, which is like an addictive drug to every generation, offers the means to disconnect and escape responsibilities from a world of chaos. People seem to be devolving intellectually as computers evolve into the masters of a race of beings that are slipping into the haze of dementia and retardation. Thus, consider that in 1965, Moore examined the density of transistors at which cost is minimized, and observed that, as transistors were made smaller through advances in photolithography, this number would increase at “a rate of roughly a factor of two per year”.The term “Moore’s law” was coined around 1970 by the Caltech professor, VLSI pioneer, and entrepreneur Carver Mead. Moore may have heard Douglas Engelbart, a co-inventor of today’s mechanical computer mouse, discuss the projected downscaling of integrated circuit size in a 1960 lecture.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moore's_law See Also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transistor_count Thus during the recession of 1990, many PC users were using computers that had engines like an Intel 80486, which was the first x86 chip that used more than a million transistors. This chip had a Specified max clock rate between 16 MHz to 100 MHz.Conversly, PC users during The Early “W” Bush reign of 2001 were using 7th-generation architecture, called NetBurst in Pentium 4 processors, with Max CPU clock between 1.3 GHz to 3.8 GHz Interestingly, in this late stage of The Bush Coup deflationary spiral, Intel be attempting to sell Tukwila, a processor which may pack more than 2 billion transistors on a single chip and IMHO, place supercomputing within the reach of people that will have no clue as to what they are dong. Moore’s Law and economies of scale are the dominant factors in supercomputer design: a single modern desktop PC is now more powerful than a 15-year old supercomputer, and the design concepts that allowed past supercomputers to out-perform contemporaneous desktop machines have now been incorporated into commodity PCs. This is a (very) rough draft and I’m still working on so piss off…. and no this is NOT a “kewt kitteh”! Anonymous August 5, 2008 at 10:46 am Ok, sorry for all the typos and disorganization, but the theme here of dumb sleeping kitties is summed up here: The desktop PCs we all have are more powerful than 15-year old supercomputers. Why is that important in this soon to be lost trivia? This is important, because during the recession of 1990, when housing was a bit of a problem in places like New England. Back then, people were in somewhat of a relative slow-motion economy which relied on day old newspaper deliveries and afternoon news programs. IMHO, that was inefficient market, due to the fact that information discovery was a far more tedious process. Arms length transactions and stock deals took time and research was a matter of getting in a car and going through stacks of paperwork — if you knew what you were doing. Furthermore, government statistics and economic data associated with GDP was watched by far fewer people — thus the reaction of the public to a chain of event then was a slower process, a less contained or controlled process. Hence, history needs to be thought of in terms of information efficiency and the correlation of economic inefficiency, i.e, the reaction time and analysis of an event is simply a matter of perspective and proportion. As an example: On Black Monday of October 1987 a stock collapse of unprecedented size lopped 22.6 percent off the Dow Jones Industrial Average. The collapse, larger than that of 1929, was handled well by the economy and the stock market began to quickly recover. However the lumbering savings and loans were beginning to collapse, putting the savings of millions of Americans in jeopardy. It soon turned out that the quick recovery was illusory, and by 1990, economic malaise had returned with the beginning of the Gulf War and the resulting 1990 spike in the price of oil, which increased inflation but to less of a degree as the oil crisis ten years earlier. Nevertheless, for the next several years high unemployment, massive government budgetary deficits, and slow Gross Domestic Product (GDP) growth affected the United States until late 1992 and Canada until 1995.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Late_1980s_recession To be continued? Anonymous August 5, 2008 at 10:51 am I think the final point was headed towards a conclusion that the people playing at home are using data that is two years old, because the government computers are faster than home computers, and that lag time distorts a perception of efficient markets. I’m done, I’m humiliated and apologize… and so much for thinking on-the-fly Anonymous August 5, 2008 at 11:23 am There are no ‘dumb kitties’. Kitties quickly identify the people that are prone to admire cat skills and intelligence. Same kitties are quick to suck up to cat-prone people without appearing to do so. Kitties appear to remain aloof but that is part of their game plan and allure. Soon, the kitties are in charge and the human is well trained to do the kittie’s bidding. Nothing dumb about such an approach, eh? The kittie in the photo sees the mouse as a rival for attention from it’s trained human…So, Kittie is attempting to claim the mouse and eliminate a rival. River Anonymous August 5, 2008 at 12:23 pm I have seen similar problems on Dog Whisperer TV show and this does look like a form of alpha domination with the mouse being submissive as well as the human who is obviously caught up in this charade and substituting control with taking pictures and thus being absent from the moment and hence not being a good owner. Humane Society needs this as poster for problems. Anonymous August 5, 2008 at 1:52 pm Obviously if your a regular reader of Yves, this is a nod towards currency intervention and the invisible hand of the sleeping deflation giant, who awakens every now and then to play with tangled yarn! Anonymous August 5, 2008 at 2:51 pm Bollocks, this is about wasting time and burning out. My God, Yves deserves a retreat to refresh and come back here at some point and continue this bloody great war she is waging against fraud in the economy! Good on you girl, take naps and recharge! Chris August 5, 2008 at 3:19 pm Pictures and words. The names, what the objects are called, and what they are seem to match. Kitty knows how to catch mice from the get go. It is supposed to be hereditary, from mom. But, Kitty can be “girl or young woman of loose character” (OED 2nd ed SV). Mouse can be “a darling, a sweetheart,” “a woman arrested for disorderly conduct, a young girl” (OED SV). Now they are both the same kind of thing. No longer hunter and hunted, eater and eaten.Their names, what they are called, and what they are, no longer match in quite the same way. What was a determinate image becomes somehow indeterminate. Kitty can also be “pool of money”, “earnings, liquid capital reserve fund”. A mouse a “black eye”, “muscle”, or even a “police informer”. All these can sleep too, in their own ways. Is it possible to go from the names things are called to the image, or only from the image to the names. Wouldn’t it be great to call “Kitty, kitty” one morning and find a whole litter of cash deposited outside the back door? Of course, in some places the plastic thing would be named mouse, but called moose. What would Kitty do then? Comments are closed. Tip Jar Please Donate or Subscribe!