82,892
edits
Template:M intro design Metis: Difference between revisions
Template:M intro design Metis (view source)
Revision as of 09:29, 15 November 2023
, 15 November 2023no edit summary
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{Quote|“Der Tod eines Menschen: das ist eine Katastrophe. Hunderttausend Tote: das ist eine Statistik!”<ref>“The death of one man: that is a catastrophe. A hundred thousand deaths: that is a statistic!”</ref> :—Kurt Tucholsky, 1925}} {{Quote|If you owe the bank $100, that’s your problem. If you owe the bank $100 million, that’s the bank’s problem. : John Paul Getty?}}An observation from {{author|James C. Scott}}’s {{br|Seeing Like A State}}, picked up...") |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
:—Kurt Tucholsky, 1925}} | :—Kurt Tucholsky, 1925}} | ||
{{Quote|If you owe the bank $100, that’s your problem. If you owe the bank $100 million, that’s the bank’s problem. | {{Quote|If you owe the bank $100, that’s your problem. If you owe the bank $100 million, that’s the bank’s problem. | ||
: | :—John Paul Getty (''attrib.'')}}An observation from {{author|James C. Scott}}’s {{br|Seeing Like A State}}, picked up in the early exchanges of {{author|Allen Farrington}}’s {{br|Bitcoin Is Venice}} is that of the difference of “[[metis]]” — knowhow, experience, wisdom, accumulated ''[[heurism]]'' — what we call ''[[subject matter expertise]]'', and which stands in distinction to — in forlorn ''defiance'' of — [[high modernism]] which solves everything at scale, by abstract model referencing the homogenised general and not the intricate particular. | ||
The difference between the top-down [[averagarianism|averagarian]] view and the [[subject matter expert]]’s view. The administrator knows that the portfolio risk is, say 5 percent and succeeds it she can “manage the portfolio” to suffer a risk of less than 5 percent — which she may do by ''changing'' the portfolio to remove what she sees as the high-risk instruments — whereas an individual risk manager manages a single instrument with a given risk of 5 percent and succeeds if she can avoid that risk altogether. For the individual risk manager, there is no 5 percent loss. The loss is either nil or 100%. | The difference between the top-down [[averagarianism|averagarian]] view and the [[subject matter expert]]’s view. The administrator knows that the portfolio risk is, say 5 percent and succeeds it she can “manage the portfolio” to suffer a risk of less than 5 percent — which she may do by ''changing'' the portfolio to remove what she sees as the high-risk instruments — whereas an individual risk manager manages a single instrument with a given risk of 5 percent and succeeds if she can avoid that risk altogether. For the individual risk manager, there is no 5 percent loss. The loss is either nil or 100%. | ||