Even if you were to make a new site, you still have the same problem of garnering a responsive audience/community. Ever since newmogul went out, none of the fragment sites (this being one of them) really commanded much of an audience, and if it did, the audience was passive and didn't provide the quality comments that are seen in successful online communities.
Just uploaded a couple, if anything is looking for info on anything specific let me know (options, futures, corp. finance, day-trading, trading psych, etc.)
I've read The Black Swan and thought it was absolutely worth the time. May cover slightly different topics / a more philosophical approach than Fooled by Randomness though. Read both, if you possibly can and read Falkenblog's comments on the (lack of) worth of Taleb's insights afterwards to make up your mind.
David Einhorn - Fooling Some of the People All of the Time
It's a great story of how to analyze companies, uncover fraud and what's wrong with the SEC. Not exactly a page-turner, but very thorough and interesting for any short-seller.
It's old now, but I enjoyed Barbarians at the Gates. Also the bio on Wayne Huizenga, who built up Waste Management and Blockbuster, which I've just finished reading. I'd also recommend Bob Rubin's book, "In An Uncertain World".
Besides an entertaining read, it really drives home the point that life is largely about curiosity and solving interesting puzzles. The book could just as easily have stolen Linus' title, Just for Fun.
It's here: http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=6298082n&tag=cont...
Indeed well worth watching, though there was nothing really new, but that was to be expected. It's 60 minutes, after all. But they were able to make it accessible to a broader audience, I hope.
I noticed that the picture at the top of the story was from 60 Minutes. If you have a chance to watch something, I recommend Inside the Collapse, which can be found on the 60 Minutes website. It is well worth watching.
I don't get two parts of Smith's debunking. If someone could explain that to me, I'd greatly appreciate it!
- The 'long side' at the time and with hindsight seemed so much larger; blaming the few (known) shorts who ultimately profited for enlarging the market seems counter-intuitive, to say the least. How could they have gone short on dozens of billions of synthetic products? Can anyone confirm her numbers?
- Also more philosophically, whose 'fault' is it to profit from madness? The one who recognized it and bet against it, thereby fueling the fire, or the one who invented madness in the first place? She seems to deem the shorts responsible for Wall Street's foolishness not being able to come up with liquidity fast enough and therefore going virtually bankrupt and needing a bail-out, which they undeservingly get. So why exactly does she consider the shorts responsible for Wall Street's failure in foresight/calculation?
We're looking at a number of manufacturing outsourcing projects, and one of my fears is that if we set up an international supply chain, a 10-20% correction in currency trades could eliminate some of the gains -- which makes you wonder how much of the manufacturing outsourcing phenomenon, particularly for automated production, is partly a function of forced currency imbalances.
>...but I'm surprised that Lewis isn't more upfront about his own misjudgments as he makes the talk show rounds.
Well, he's trying to sell books.
I imagine, at least for the general ("talk-show") population, exposing his misjudgments would probably hinder book sales. (Even though, I/we'd appreciate it if he did.)
