Pink Iguana

Home » References » FPGA Books and Bets and Beliefs

FPGA Books and Bets and Beliefs


Guy Escherman,, FPGA Books, here. Check out the website. Interesting combination of honeypot information and advertising. If you are 22 year old Knuth, Eilenberg, Walter Rudin, or even Dieudonne in 2013 it is not obvious that you do the life long publisher deal. I think Tao and Lipton/Regan are way out in front on this but there is still a ways to go before equilibrium settles. Seems like an idea is to mix Tao What’s New and polymath with digital ads a little bit. Tao appears to want leverage for broader polymath reach, sort of like digital advertisement but he’s not going to spend  for adwords the way Ford might. In certain non-trivial ways Tao is a way bigger deal than Ford, potentially even to digital ad folks. Maybe NSF/DARPA wants to underwrite digital ads for collaborative mathematics to prime the pump. It seems like Tao, Green, Baez, and Gowers are all headed in this direction (e.g., selected papers network) particularly if they work to replace/improve on the distribution/functionality provided by Elsevier Journals.

The Designer’s Guide to VHDL by Peter J. Ashenden

This is the authoritative reference book on VHDL. It’s not a quick and easy introduction to language, but it’s a must-have for everyone that is serious about designing FPGAs with VHDL.

Alex Tabarrok, Marginal Revolution, Bets and Beliefs, here.

Tyler has argued that portfolios reveal beliefs. This is false. If transaction costs were zero and there were an asset for every possible future state of the world then this would be true. Since transaction costs are not zero and there are many more states of the world than there are assets–even when we combine assets–portfolios do not reveal beliefs. Portfolios might reveal a few coarse beliefs but otherwise no go. Since most people have lots of beliefs about the future but don’t even have a portfolio (beyond human capital) this should be obvious.

Do bets reveal beliefs? Usually but not necessarily. Two people made bets with Noah Smith. Each thought Noah was an idiot for making the bet. Noah, however, had arbitraged so that he couldn’t lose. Clever Noah! Noah’s bets, either alone or in conjunction, did not reveal his beliefs.  But is this the usual situation? No.

– See more at:


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: