I was looking at my referrers and noticed I’d gotten a lot of hits from blog hot or not in the last couple of days. I think it is because a couple of days ago I went and updated the keywords to conform to my categories. This must have moved me back higher in rotation.
I decided to do my part for blog hot or not and started going through a few blogs. There were some interesting blog names, though I didn’t find any blogs I wanted to keep reading.
I’ve come to the conclusion that I’m probably not going to be selling my car and buying a motorcycle. I’m still going to take the class — have to its already paid for — but the ultimate thing was looking forward in time. If I sell my car and buy a motorcycle, in a year I’ll have no car payment and no car. If I don’t get a motorcycle, in a year I will have no car payment and a car. So in a year it is moot. The only thing I gain is not having a car payment for a few months.
But that aside I still want a motorcycle. They are just cool. I’ve decided I want a sport bike instead of a cruiser and I’ve pretty much narrowed it down to the Suzuki SV650S, which isn’t a true sport bike, but a “combo” bike. So it is suppose to be more comfortable to ride. Everyone who reviewed it on Epinions loved it. I probably prefer it had full faring, but it still looks cool and you can add that later.
While looking for more pictures of the SV650 I found SportBikeRider.us which has a ton of pictures sent in by regular users. That’s where I got the picture at the left. That’s not the SV650, but the RGSX, which is way too much bike for me.
The big problem with all the reporting is it isn’t betting. It speculating. One of the ideas behind it is people can put money behind their opinions and other can put more money behind it if they agree. Then it rises in value. Then then other look at the idea and if they think it is crap, don’t invest in it and it loses value.
Its a marketplace of ideas where you actually have to risk something to vote on your ideas. Anyone can sit around with a six pack and say Iran will invade Iraq as soon as we leave, but few would invest money on it.
One question/thought I have is while this might end up being predictive, it also would cause the things not to happen, therefore making them not pay off. If I invest in someone setting off a nuke on Temple Mount in Jerusalem before the end of the year, and it goes up in value, then the Mossad is going to be watching for it and may catch some organization when they try to put their nuke on the mount and stop it. Then my investment contract doesn’t pay, because it didn’t happen.
Of course the solution to this is to make the contracts on attempts to happen. So I say someone will attempt to put a bomb on Temple Mount. Then if they are stopped or succeed the contract pays.
The problem a lot of people have with this is if they succeed the government ends up paying people for predicting the loss of lives. That sounds horrible. But it helps the system get better in the future. If I invest right, the government should have listened to me, and so should other investors. So I develop a reputation as someone who predict well and maybe next time we can prevent a problem. So yes the act sounds horrible – paying someone who predicted the death of others – the ultimate outcome is the prevention of future events.
The real question is “Will it work?” If it improves our ability to predict and stop terrorism, then it is a tool we should use.