Comments for DCF Nerds http://www.dcfnerds.com Applying Undue Dilligence Sun, 30 Mar 2014 19:23:05 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=4.6.6 Comment on Predicting NFL Scores: A Bayesian Approach by Christopher Peters http://www.dcfnerds.com/363/nfl-a-bayesian-model/#comment-27 Sun, 30 Mar 2014 19:23:05 +0000 http://www.dcfnerds.com/?p=363#comment-27 Bravo!! I see what you mean, not univariate testing. Very interesting. I’ve been interested in point processes. They’re increasingly being used in survival analysis, too. I believe the last analysis here is a PP, but I’m not 100% sure. http://nbviewer.ipython.org/github/CamDavidsonPilon/Probabilistic-Programming-and-Bayesian-Methods-for-Hackers/blob/master/Chapter1_Introduction/Chapter1_Introduction.ipynb

]]>
Comment on Charitable Discount Rates by margin http://www.dcfnerds.com/167/charitable-discount-rates/#comment-4 Thu, 21 Mar 2013 13:30:04 +0000 http://www.dcfnerds.com/?p=167#comment-4 It is very likely and predictable, under the reasonable assumptions:

1) that resource access is limited by light speed or some other limit and

2) that the amount of economic output per resource unit is limited, e.g. by diminishing returns to efficiency innovations

While this is clearly a while off and the world will look different when these limits are approached, they are still forseeable limits.

Of course, along the way an investor may expect Black Swans and politicial or military disruptions, maybe technologies gone wrong, and so on.

On the flip side, disruptive technologies (e.g. automation, fast reproduction, fast education, mind copying, new energy sources…) may make interest rates far more attractive, which actually makes the original argument stronger.

Maybe you really face the question whether you want to make 1000 lives better now (in a not optimally productive way) or give free leisure lives to 10 million additional people in 200 years, using the resources from your R&D investments.

Would you really trade 10 million lives for 1000 just because they are further away in time?

I find my intuitions fluctuating.

]]>
Comment on Charitable Discount Rates by DMorgan http://www.dcfnerds.com/167/charitable-discount-rates/#comment-3 Wed, 20 Mar 2013 16:37:33 +0000 http://www.dcfnerds.com/?p=167#comment-3 That’s a true disclaimer, I suppose. When the four horses of economic distress make ANY positive interest rate impossible, even he who never discounts will give money to charity.

That doesn’t seem particularly likely or predictable, though.

]]>
Comment on Charitable Discount Rates by Margin http://www.dcfnerds.com/167/charitable-discount-rates/#comment-2 Wed, 20 Mar 2013 16:22:30 +0000 http://www.dcfnerds.com/?p=167#comment-2 “If a charitable fund can either donate $100 now or invest the money and donate $100*(1+g) in a year, they’ll always take the latter if they do not discount the benefits of charity.”

No, there will be a time when economic growth is no longer possible and the probability of losses is so high that total wealth can only be maintained and redistributed, not increased.

When this happens, paying the funds out to do maximum good at that time is maximally efficient.

]]>