The Sims torture test

I laughed long and hard at this test. LANGUAGE WARNING! HUMOUR WARNING!

I guess people actually play this game to make their little sims happy. I'll admit that i did that for awhile, but to be honest, it just got boring. So of course I reverted to my typical gaming pattern of torturing innocents to death.

Another entertaining conspiracy

From the department of the-mind-is-a-terrible-thing-to-taste:

THEY DID IT AGAIN. . . . ANOTHER HUGE SALE OF OPTION CONTRACTS ON $4.5 BILLION WORTH OF STOCKS BETTING THE MARKET WILL LOSE 30%-50% OF ITS VALUE IN FOUR WEEKS! THIS SALE ON THE SPY.X AND THE ONE FROM YESTERDAY ON THE SPY.Y (MENTIONED TWO STORIES BELOW) ARE BEING REFERRED-TO BY FOLKS IN THE MARKET AS "BIN LADEN TRADES" BECAUSE ONLY AN ACT OF TERRORISM AKIN TO 9-11 (WITHIN THE NEXT FOUR WEEKS) COULD MAKE THESE OPTIONS VALUABLE.

There are 65,000 contracts @ $750.00 for the SPX 700 calls for open interest. That controls 6.5 million shares at $750 = $4.5 Billion. Not a single trade. But quite a bit of $$ on a contract that is 700 points away from current value. No one would buy that deep "in the money" calls. No reason to. So if they were sold looks like someone betting on massive dislocation. Lots of very strange option activity that I haven't seen before.

The entity or individual offering these sales can only make money if the market drops 30%-50% within the next four weeks. If the market does not drop, the entity or invidual involved stands to lose over $1 billion just for engaging in these contracts! Clearly, someone knows something big is going to happen BEFORE the options expire on Sept. 21.

THEORIES:

The following theories are being discussed widely within the stock and options markets today regarding the enormous and very unusual activity reported above and two stories below. Those theories are:
1) A massive terrorist attack is going to take place before Sept. 21 to tank the markets, OR;
2) China, reeling over losing $10 Billion in bad loans to the sub-prime mortgage collapse presently taking place, is going to dump US currency and tank all of Capitalism with a Communist fianncial
revolution.

Either scenario is bad and the clock is ticking. The drop-dead date of these contracts is September 21. Whatever is going to happen MUST take place between now and then or the folks involved in these contracts will lose over $1 billion for having engaged in this activity.

If this report is true (and I doubt it since the person posting it did not give any links at all, even to non-credible sources, for his information) then I think that the two theories are incorrect because a) For the market to tank by 50% would require a massive terrorist attack many times the magnitude of 9/11, like a Nuke going off somewhere in the US. Market losses after 9/11 were never as severe as 50%. b) For China to "bet" money on the US stockmarket based on their plan to massively devalue the US Dollar would be like investing money in a company you're about to destroy.

Six kids, two trips to the hospital

From the department of in-an-infinite-universe-anything-is-possible:

A woman in Ohio has given birth to her second set of triplets.

Victoria Lasita and her husband Tim conceived both sets naturally, without fertility treatments that increase the chance of multiple pregnancies.

"Holy smokes. Do you know what the odds of that are?" fertility expert Dr Glen Hofmann told the Cincinnati Enquirer.

The chances of conceiving one set of triplets naturally were about one in 8,000, making the odds of having them twice far higher, he said.

Having triplets once did not affect the chances of having triplets a second time, added Dr Hofmann, medical director of the Bethesda Center for Reproductive Health and Fertility.

Economist predicts 40% chance of world recession

Calculated Risk has the info:

• Scenario 1. The Economist Intelligence Unit’s central forecast, to which we attach a probability of 60%, sees the impact being contained by timely monetary policy action, with only a modest effect on the global economy.

• Scenario 2. Our main risk scenario, with a 30% probability, envisages the US falling into recession, with substantial fallout in the rest of the world.

• Scenario 3. Should the US enter recession, another, darker scenario arises: that corrective action fails, and severe economic repercussions cascade from the US into the world economy with devastating effect. We attach only a 10% probability to this outcome, but the potential impact is so severe that it warrants careful consideration.

I've scanned this report and I'm quite disappointed in it for two main reasons.

The first is that there is no mention of a potential oil shock. In July, just before the subprime crisis began to spray all over the financial bowl, The Economist admitted that oil production was not keeping up with demand, thus making the price higher. Sadly, it put this down to choices by oil producer rather than even entertain the possibility that production may have reached a geological peak. In many ways, the price of oil acts in the same way as interest rates - a high oil price encourages inflation and high interest rates, while a low price encourages low inflation and low interest rates. In theory, OPEC could act as the world's central bank by flooding world markets with crude and causing oil prices to plummet, thus acting as a international economic stimulant - which would be great if there were no production limits to pumping out the stuff. By ignoring the problem of oil supplies, the Economist's 60% estimation of "everything will be okay" looks way too generous.

The second is that there is no discussion of the overvalued US Dollar. The US has been sucking in imports from all over the world and has paid for this by borrowing from international investors. This is partly responsible for the "easy money" environment that created the subprime bubble in the first place (the other cause is the Fed's low interest rates since 2002). With recession the US a real possibility, it stands to reason that international investors may decide to pull out of direct investment in US companies. With more profitable investments in places other than the US, this outflow of capital would result in less demand for the US dollar, weakening it somewhat. Additionally, if Ben Bernanke and the Fed decide to aggressively lower interest rates in response to the subprime mess, international investors in US bonds will wish to invest in more profitable debt markets where interest rates are more attractive - the effect of which will be to lower the value of the US dollar. Unfortunately, a drop in the value of the US dollar will encourage domestic inflation in the US which should therefore result in higher interest rates to cope - which would be deadly to an economy that is on the brink of a recession anyway due to the subprime crisis.

My guestimation is: 25% chance of recovery, 50% chance of recession, 25% chance of severe recession.

The full report can be downloaded here (pdf file 507.6kb)

The Arminian Doctrine of God and the Minneapolis Bridge Collapse

Here's a really interesting theological piece from Solus Christus. This is a copy and paste of the entire article:

After the recent bridge collapse in Minneapolis, John Piper responded as pastor of Bethlehem Baptist Church. Bethlehem is located only a mile away from where the bridge fell. Pastor John interpreted the bridge collapse according to a Calvinist doctrine of God. Here's an excerpt:

The meaning of the collapse of this bridge is that John Piper is a sinner and should repent or forfeit his life forever. That means I should turn from the silly preoccupations of my life and focus my mind’s attention and my heart’s affection on God and embrace Jesus Christ as my only hope for the forgiveness of my sins and for the hope of eternal life. That is God’s message in the collapse of this bridge. That is his most merciful message: there is still time to turn from sin and unbelief and destruction for those of us who live. If we could see the eternal calamity from which he is offering escape we would hear this as the most precious message in the world.

We prayed during our family devotions. Talitha (11 years old) and Noel and I prayed earnestly for the families affected by the calamity and for the others in our city. Talitha prayed “Please don’t let anyone blame God for this but give thanks that they were saved.” When I sat on her bed and tucked her in and blessed her and sang over her a few minutes ago, I said, “You know, Talitha, that was a good prayer, because when people ‘blame’ God for something, they are angry with him, and they are saying that he has done something wrong. That’s what “blame” means: accuse somebody of wrongdoing. But you and I know that God did not do anything wrong. God always does what is wise. And you and I know that God could have held up that bridge with one hand.” Talitha said, “With his pinky.” “Yes,” I said, “with his pinky. Which means that God had a purpose for not holding up that bridge, knowing all that would happen, and he is infinitely wise in all that he wills.”

This Tuesday Roger Olson, professor of theology at George W. Truett Theological Seminary at Baylor College offered an interpretation of that same event from the perspective of an Arminian doctrine of God. Here's an excerpt:

In this world, because of our ignorance and sinfulness, really bad things sometimes happen and people do really evil and wicked things. Not because God secretly plans and prods them, but because God has said to fallen, sinful people, "OK, not my will then, but thine be done -- for now."

And God says, "Pray because sometimes I can intervene to stop innocent suffering when people pray; that's one of my self-limitations. I don't want to do it all myself; I want your involvement and partnership in making this a better world."

It's a different picture of God than most conservative Christians grew up with, but it's the only one (so far as I can tell) that relieves God of responsibility for sin and evil and disaster and calamity.

The God of Calvinism scares me; I'm not sure how to distinguish him from the devil. If you've come under the influence of Calvinism, think about its ramifications for the character of God. God is great but also good. In light of all the evil and innocent suffering in the world, he must have limited himself.

I admit I wholeheartedly embrace and relish the Calvinistic doctrine of God. I find it difficult to imagine life apart from it. I also find the interpretation of evil offered by it personally satisfying. But when I delve deeply into this issue (which I am all for by the way), I encounter difficulties that seem to be insurmountable for fallen human understanding. Those are the places, in the hard work of loving God with all my mind, that I fall to my knees in awe and offer up sacrifices of praise to my infinitely beautiful God.

As the two excerpts above demonstrate, the contrast between the views is striking. There are basically two ways of interpreting the evil in this world with respect to the doctrine of God. Fundamentally, we must either admit a limitation in God (i.e. the autonomy of his moral creatures) or a limitation in ourselves (i.e. extreme difficulty in reconciling a paradox in God's revelation). Notwithstanding what I view as the clear testimony of Holy Scripture, I am much more comfortable with the latter. The English Puritan Stephen Charnock has put it, rather wisely, like this:

But what if the foreknowledge of God, and the liberty of the will, cannot be fully reconciled by man? Shall we therefore deny the perfection in God to support a liberty in ourselves? Shall we rather fasten ignorance upon God, and accuse him of blindness to maintain our liberty?

The Arminian says: Rather than blaming God for evil, let's blame him for ignorance instead.

The Calvinist says: Rather than blaming God for ignorance, let's blame ourselves for ignorance instead.

What does the face of truth look like?

It is ugly, hideously ugly:

The general who headed the British army during the 2003 Iraq invasion said that former U.S. defense secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld's handling of postwar Iraq was "intellectually bankrupt" and pointed to Rumsfeld as "one of those most responsible for the current situation in Iraq."

Mike Jackson, the British former chief of general staff who retired last year, strongly criticized Rumsfeld and the U.S. postwar effort in Iraq in his new book, "Soldier." The Daily Telegraph is to begin serializing the book Monday, after publishing some excerpts and an interview Saturday.

The eye

What's it symbolise? It is my great eye of judgement, looking down upon you saying "you have a speck there!".

Only in Soviet Union

More pics here

Divorce Rates in the US

Are highest in the "Bible Belt" according to a survey from a few years ago.

Who is to blame? Obviously the family-hating, liberal states of America (who, incidentally, have the lowest divorce rates).

Changes in world cricket I want

Here's a list of things that I think would make world cricket better:

A World Cricket Team
Basically the idea is to have a cricket team that plays Test, One-Day and 20-20 cricket and who draws their players from non-Test nations like Ireland, Kenya and Zimbabwe. I discuss this idea in more detail here.

A free market for First class players
Imagine if English County sides could employ the services of any cricketer they want, without restriction? Imagine if English County players could be employed to play for teams in Australia, South Africa, New Zealand, India and others with no restriction either? What if a Bangladesh side offers an Australian batsman an enticing offer to play in Bangladesh?This idea is explained further here.

Randomly determining which team bats first
The toss - the first and sometimes most controversial part of the match. Instead of tossing to see which captain makes the decision, why not simply use the toss to determine which side bats first and which side bowls first without even asking the captains? Eg: Heads for England batting first, tails for Australia batting first.

No more rolling pitches between innings
Pitch preparation these days has made top class cricket matches more biased towards batsmen. An indication of this is the amount of current Test batsmen who have career averages over 50. I think pitches should be allowed to wear out faster as the match progresses to encourage and reward good bowling. Cricket law allows the pitch to be rolled between innings - that should be stopped, allowing the pitch to deteriorate faster. The pitch on day one should be a batsman's paradise. The pitch on day five should be a minefield.

No more mowing during play
Modern outfields are as smooth as billiard tables. They give great value for shots played if Bill Lawry is to be believed. Unfortunately, like perfect pitches, they skew the match towards batsmen. If the grass in the outfield is allowed to grow as the match progresses, then it will be harder to score runs. Currently cricket law allows the outfield to be mowed before and after each day's play - this, too, should be stopped. The outfield on day one should be as smooth as a billiard table in keeping with the idea that day one of the Test should be a batsman's paradise. By day five, with an increasingly shaggy outfield restricting runs, the match has swung towards the bowler.

Restricting One Day careers to 100 matches
One Day cricket is profitable yet, in order for fresh players to be introduced and for experienced players to be able to extend their careers, a cap should be made on the amount of one-day cricket one player can be allowed to play. The Test and first-class career of Shane Warne was extended because of his retirement from one-day cricket.

A World Cup of Test Cricket
This has been around for years but obstacles to this competition are disappearing. The best place for the competition to be would be England, as it allows the least disruption. It would involve all eight test playing nations (Zimbabwe will not play Tests again for some time) playing each other once in five-day matches throughout an entire English Summer. Bonus points can be awarded to take into account draws, close losses or big wins. A World Cup final (played over six days) would occur between the top two teams, with the top team given bonus runs at the start of the match as a reward for their finishing top of the table.





© 2007 Neil McKenzie Cameron, http://one-salient-oversight.blogspot.com/

FAQ about the author





This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.