The Truth Engineering blog started first (July 24, 2007) with severalfold motivations but without a specific focus which does allow a more general viewpoint. Then, with the rumblings on the web in regard to the 787 missing its fly date starting to increase, this blog started with that focus but then took on a larger scope (these seeds are being updated).
In that larger scope, the idiocy of the financial world will be analyzed much more deeply than can be the 787 program. Why? It is supposed to be open, much more so than can be some proprietary program. Yet, we've seen privatization of mechanism (it allows Grasso keep his take). Not that the engineering/program topic won't be used in the future, after all engineering touches everything and has some blame for the current messes that we see. Of course, the 'real' engineering viewpoint will say that management forced decisions that ultimately screw things up.
As an aside, one task for each blog will be to have a name for reference to 'self' to inhibit the use of the royal 'we' as may have happened now and then. So, we'll use 7oops7 for now.
Of late, 7oops7 has been getting more deeply into what has happened in financial and economic theory (and practice) the past couple of decades than was thought wise before. You see, many have gone mad thinking about these things. How else can we (oops) account for the growing idiocy and all around growth of hapless victims? These are dismal sciences, indeed.
Engineering comes out with something real, such as an airplane which can be tested against its goals. Finance is for the most part a game, as has been said before. 7oops7 has been incredulously poking at shenanigans that the lemmings (from the top, I might add you) have allowed, pursued, and pondered (as it creates holes in the pockets of the many). Gosh, some of these things don't even make sense to most (understanding requires initiation into the brotherhood) and really border on unethical practices (are we in a global blindness here?).
As said before, quoting the recently-departed William F. Buckley, Jr, 'stop' (the madness). Just because the computer and mathematics allow the gaming of the market does not give it any more truth than what it is. What is it? A very shaking system based upon what several metaphors could describe: sand, cards, ...
There have been sane voices, such as Minsky (the economist, not the perceptronist) which is encouraging. Methinks that the genie is out of the bottle, yet putting the more risky in a sandbox is not impossible. All it would take, to start, would be a good explanation about why we have all the instability. Perhaps, 7oops7 could attempt such, knowing, of course, that the myth of Sisyphus is apropos. Let's see, how much time do we have?
09/12/2009 -- Sandbox was used without definition. Let's discuss that concept.
12/05/2008 -- It got so bad that even in a Republican time socialization of loss was allowed to bail out the privatization of profit.