Be advised: this thread is not for serious in-depth discussion of weighty topics (we have a link for that), this thread is not for anything Culture War related. This thread is for Fun. You got jokes? Share 'em. You got silly questions? Ask 'em.
- 78
- 3
What is this place?
This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a
court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to
optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.
The weekly Culture War threads host the most
controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are
appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy;
if in doubt, post!
Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts.
You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.
Why are you called The Motte?
A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently,
it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey",
originally identified by
philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial
but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens
this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for
the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired
propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."
On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.
New post guidelines
If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it.
A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts
such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a
submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).
Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or
significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.
If in doubt, please post it!
Rules
- Courtesy
- Content
- Engagement
- When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
- Proactively provide evidence in proportion to how partisan and inflammatory your claim might be.
- Accept temporary bans as a time-out, and don't attempt to rejoin the conversation until it's lifted.
- Don't attempt to build consensus or enforce ideological conformity.
- Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
- The Wildcard Rule
- The Metarule
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
This is a bitcoin publicity stunt, but anyway, what should you do if you really believed it. If he loses he’s out 1M of today's money. If he wins, in 26k. This is for an extremely unlikely event, so 1:1 odds would already be great for the counterparty. This is 40:1.
The market can provide better odds than this. Buy some June 16 550 spy calls for, let me check, one cent. If the dollar devalues by 40, spy will be worth 15500. Spy might lose some value, margin of safety and all that, let’s say 3000, and let’s add another 4 cents of transaction fees, why not. Gives odds of 0.05 (times 40 due to hyperinflation) to 2500 in his favour, that’s 1:1250 . Don't settle for a toyota when you could be a billlionaire.
Will it? Wouldn't people take all their money out of the US? Gold, BTC, ammunition, roubles and renminbi are the play IMO.
More options
Context Copy link
Its debatable whether there are any securities one could buy that would pay out at positive net real value if the dollar devalued by 40x over 90 days. Far out of the money call options would definitely not pay out. This isn't about reading the fine print; there is no possible sequence of words in the options disclosure document that would prevent the government from canceling the transactions of "speculators betting against the wellbeing of the American People," for example
Is there a precedent for this? Technically, I was betting on america, spy to the moon, yee-hee.
There is precedent for exchanges cancelling trades after execution, and there is precedent for the US Government seizing speculative assets immediately before they predictably rise in value. You can extrapolate how exchanges and governments would react to even more extreme market events.
It's not much. LME got a lot of shit for that, accusations of being in bed with the losers, lawsuits still pending etc.
In 2008, some bet fifty to one against mortgages, that was less ambiguous, and they kept the money. Besides, you think they wouldn't let apes profit from a call, yet look on your bitcoin gains with benevolence? Closing that door is the first thing they'll do.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link