[ExI] Sudden outbreak of democracy baffles US pundits

[Stefano Vaj]

On Tue, Oct 7, 2008 at 3:56 PM, Jef Allbright <jef at jefallbright.net> wrote:
> Yes. Or, a more effective broad synthesis of the likelihood function
> behind the bits of public information, which, if you think about it,
> is at the opposite end of the spectrum from what's normally considered
> "special" information. (Not to discount Stathis' very valid point.)

In fact, what you might use to "beat the market" might be a broader
(and more rapid!) synthesis of the likelihood function not of what is
actually going to happen to the company, but of what is going to
happen to the public, i.e., the market, as a consequence of the
diffusion of public information as soon as they become public...

In fact, insider information have value simply because they get you in
advance information that is going to become public at a later stage or
to influence data that are going to be made public at a later stage.
Insider information that is going to remain secret forever and does
not directly affect such data is of little use, unless you later
diffuse it yourself... :-)

Stefano Vaj