#informationasymmetry — Public Fediverse posts

A jackal turns blue after falling into indigo dye, claims special creation, and is accepted as king without question. He bans his own kind and lives well until he answers a howl. The animals catch on at once. The frame story shows the same principle used to create distrust through selective reports. Have you seen manufactured credibility collapse the moment the original identity appears? #Panchatantra #BlueJackal #Strategy #IndianLiterature #InformationAsymmetry https://babutellsstories.blogspot.com/2026/08/who-was-blue-jackal-panchatantra.html?utm_source=mastodon&utm_medium=social

Regulator, Naver Pay Launch Venture Capital Platform

Yonhap News The “Venture Capital Investment Platform,” jointly promoted by the Financial Supervisory Service (FSS) and Naver Pay,…
#EuropeSays #Korea #KR #Naver #FinancialSupervisoryService #informationasymmetry #investorrelations #Koreaventurecapital #LeeChan-jin #NaverPay #startupfunding #VentureCapitalInvestmentPlatform
https://www.europesays.com/korea/77419/

Surveillance Pricing: Exploiting Information Asymmetries

https://lpeproject.org/blog/surveillance-pricing-exploiting-information-asymmetries/

#HackerNews #surveillancepricing #informationasymmetry #dataethics #privacytech #marketdynamics

https://www.europesays.com/2905930/ Prof. Selva Demiralp: CBRT Must Avoid Creating Information Asymmetry with Investors #CBRT #CentralBankCommunication #InformationAsymmetry #InterestRates #InvestorMeetings #SelvaDemiralp #Transparency #Turkey #turkiye #TürkiyeMonetaryPolicy

we wouldn’t pay for potato chips like this

Mark Cuban has an idea for how to stop the runaway train that is the $38 trillion national…
#NewsBeep #News #US #USA #UnitedStates #UnitedStatesOfAmerica #Healthcare #CostPlusDrugs #Health #healthcarecosts #healthinsurance #informationasymmetry #insurance #linakhan #MarkCuban #nationaldebt #onlinepharmacy
https://www.newsbeep.com/us/393209/

we wouldn’t pay for potato chips like this

Mark Cuban has an idea for how to stop the runaway train that is the $38 trillion national…
#NewsBeep #News #Healthcare #AU #Australia #CostPlusDrugs #Health #Healthcarecosts #healthinsurance #informationasymmetry #insurance #LinaKhan #MarkCuban #nationaldebt #onlinepharmacy
https://www.newsbeep.com/au/397524/

https://www.europesays.com/uk/679953/ we wouldn’t pay for potato chips like this #CostPlusDrugs #Health #HealthCare #HealthCareCosts #HealthInsurance #Healthcare #InformationAsymmetry #Insurance #LinaKhan #MarkCuban #NationalDebt #OnlinePharmacy #UK #UnitedKingdom

https://www.europesays.com/ie/272131/ we wouldn’t pay for potato chips like this #CostPlusDrugs #Éire #Health #HealthCare #HealthCareCosts #HealthInsurance #Healthcare #IE #InformationAsymmetry #insurance #Ireland #LinaKhan #MarkCuban #NationalDebt #OnlinePharmacy

we wouldn’t pay for potato chips like this

Mark Cuban has an idea for how to stop the runaway train that is the $38 trillion national…
#NewsBeep #News #Healthcare #CostPlusDrugs #Health #healthcarecosts #healthinsurance #healthcare #informationasymmetry #Insurance #LinaKhan #MarkCuban #nationaldebt #onlinepharmacy #UK #UnitedKingdom
https://www.newsbeep.com/uk/356900/

I wrote to the Financial Times because Second Physics makes responsibility a model-internal quantity — and markets cannot price what remains undefined.

⸻

1. This is not about publicity

I did not write to the FT because I want media attention.
I did not write because I think a single working paper will “change everything”.

I wrote because a boundary moved inside science — and that boundary has direct consequences for how we build, govern, and price powerful AI systems.

The work behind this is:

“What Is a Soul? — Soul Syntax and the Relational Equation of Second Physics” (SSRN, 2025)
https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.5902022

In that paper, I define soul as a relational structure Soul(t).

I then sketch what that means in a precise way: how intention leans toward others as distance changes (correspondence pressure, A = dI/dR), how relationships evolve, and how those patterns are recorded as syntactic memory and existence over time.

It is only a blueprint. But even as a blueprint, it does something modern science has avoided for more than four centuries:

It positions soul, creation, faith, and responsibility inside the language and mathematical structures of science — not outside as “unscientific” belief.

⸻

2. Why the FT, and why now?

The point is not to win a metaphysical debate.
The point is a boundary change.

Responsibility stops being “only moral” and becomes structural — something a model can carry, record, and be constrained by.

Once you do that, you change the basis on which we talk about:

• who is accountable when AI systems cause harm,
• how liability should be assigned,
• how risk should be priced, and
• how capital and attention should be allocated.

If we ever build AI systems whose internal behaviour includes something like relational memory and responsibility in this formal sense, then the line between tool and agent will not be decided by marketing, but by structure.

That is why I chose the FT: not as a tech blog, but as a place where people think about governance, markets, and responsibility in the same frame.

⸻

3. What comes after “What Is a Soul?”

The SSRN paper is conceptual and mathematical. On top of that foundation, I have already added three working notes, also on SSRN:

1. The Law of Conservation of Responsibility: A Note in Second Physics
2. Conceptual Design for Realigning LLM Inference via Second Physics Constraints
3. Enhancing the Conceptual Design for Responsibility-Constrained LLM Inference

All three are available via my SSRN author page:
https://ssrn.com/author=7486231

Very roughly:

• (1) sketches a law of conservation of responsibility: responsibility cannot simply be pushed outside the system.
• (2) and (3) are design memos for constraining the inference of large language models with Second Physics, so that their reasoning is realigned along responsibility-aware structures.

The common aim is simple:

Move responsibility from “policy talk” to system constraints.

⸻

4. Information asymmetry is the real risk

Right now, these ideas are known only inside a very small circle of researchers. That is not just a problem of visibility. It is a problem of information asymmetry:

• A small set of large tech companies and researchers may eventually hold a new frame for defining responsibility inside AI systems.
• Most citizens, regulators, and many investors do not even know that such a frame exists.

Historically, when complex financial products spread faster than understanding of their internal structure, the bill for that hidden structure was eventually paid by societies as a whole.

We do not need to repeat that pattern with AI.

If a boundary has moved, information about that move should reach the public sphere and the markets early — not only in the post-mortem.

That is the main reason I wrote to the FT.

⸻

5. What I expected and what I received

I did not expect the FT to publish something immediately. My expectation was much simpler:

Read it seriously, ask “is this worth consideration?”, and decide.

The reply I received from FT Opinion was a standard acknowledgement:

They receive 300–400 submissions a week, cannot respond to each one individually, and will get in touch if they decide to use a piece. If there is no reply within three working days, the writer is free to offer it elsewhere.

In other words: the ball was received; the next step is their editorial judgment. For my purpose, that is enough.

⸻

6. The full email I sent to FT Opinion

Here is the full text of the email I sent to FT Opinion. I leave it here as a record, so anyone who is interested can read exactly what I wrote.

Subject:
A mathematical model of soul — implications for AI accountability, liability, and risk pricing

Dear FT Opinion Editors,

I am writing to propose an opinion piece based on my working paper:
“What Is a Soul? — Soul Syntax and the Relational Equation of Second Physics” (SSRN, 2025):
https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.5902022

The paper does two things.
First, it offers a formal answer to the question “What is a soul?” by defining soul as a relational structure Soul(t) within a framework I call Second Physics.
Second, it shows that concepts modern science has treated as “unscientific” for more than four centuries — soul, God, faith, and responsibility — can be positioned inside the language and mathematical structures of science as explicitly defined formal structures, rather than left outside as matters of belief.

This is not a theological argument. It is a boundary claim inside formal modelling. Once responsibility is defined as a model-internal quantity, questions about whether AI is merely a tool become questions about how responsibility is represented, constrained, and preserved inside systems that act in the world. That, in turn, has implications for how accountability and liability are assigned, how risk is priced, and how capital is allocated.

On top of this conceptual paper, I have developed three follow-up working notes on SSRN that take Second Physics in more technical directions:

1. The Law of Conservation of Responsibility: A Note in Second Physics
2. Conceptual Design for Realigning LLM Inference via Second Physics Constraints
3. Enhancing the Conceptual Design for Responsibility-Constrained LLM Inference

All three are available via my SSRN author page:
https://ssrn.com/author=7486231

If implemented at scale by leading AI developers, these ideas may change how we think about the internal structure of powerful AI systems: from systems that optimise loss functions, to systems whose behaviour is governed by explicit relational and responsibility constraints. That shift would not only affect how we talk about alignment, but also the regulatory and market frameworks around AI deployment.

At present, these ideas are being discussed only within a very small circle of researchers. In my view, that degree of information asymmetry is not ideal when the potential social and economic consequences are this large. There is a clear public-interest case for bringing this kind of framework into wider scrutiny and market-facing discussion, rather than leaving it to private conversations between technologists and investors.

Whether this framework ultimately stands or fails is not a matter of belief, but of examination. I believe FT readers have a right to encounter that examination through serious journalism and commentary — before it is only discussed in hindsight.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Sincerely,
Toshisada UTSUNOMIYA
Independent Researcher (Japan)
Email: [email protected]
https://ssrn.com/author=7486231

⸻

7. Where this really matters

I am not staking my life on whether the FT picks this up or not.
I am staking it on something else entirely:

Placing soul, creation, and responsibility back inside the language of science — and offering that boundary shift at least once to the public sphere.

If this blog and these papers can move the world even 1 millimetre in a better direction, that will be enough for me — for now.

https://godspeed2u.vivaldi.net/2025/12/22/why-i-wrote-to-the-financial-times-about-soul-ai-and-markets/

#AIGovernance #InformationAsymmetry #MarketsResponsibility #SecondPhysics #Soul #SoulSyntax

Oh, bravo! 🎉 A revolutionary headline promising the dawn of consumer empowerment, only to swiftly deliver a tech support tutorial on enabling #JavaScript. 🙄 Clearly, the real information asymmetry is between the headline and the actual content. 😏
https://www.economist.com/finance-and-economics/2025/10/27/the-end-of-the-rip-off-economy #consumerempowerment #techsupport #headlines #informationasymmetry #sarcasm #HackerNews #ngated

The end of the rip-off economy: consumers use LLMs against information asymmetry

https://www.economist.com/finance-and-economics/2025/10/27/the-end-of-the-rip-off-economy

#HackerNews #endofripoffeconomy #consumers #LLMs #informationasymmetry #finance #innovation

Corporate ExxonMobil ad shows scientists in a high-tech lab working to develop “low-carbon technologies" {cue: orchestral violins 🎻}

#InformationAsymmetry used. The #greenwashing ad "had disturbingly persistent 🫥 effects":

Actual investments in renewable energy ≠ claims in ads. But actual data comparisons "did not fully reverse or correct greenwashing ads' initial impact".

Big polluters increasingly present themselves as green 🏡 to avoid accountability.

https://www.desmog.com/2023/07/27/why-greenwashing-works-how-to-fight-it-gaslit/

The gas stove analogy, re. #privacy and #InformationAsymmetry

http://wearcam.org/gas_stove_analogy.htm

Asha Rangappa MSNBC Opinion: "As someone who studies and teaches about information warfare, I have analyzed the many ways Trump exploits journalistic and institutional norms to shape narratives in his favor. Trump is a master of exploiting what I refer to as information asymmetry — the space in which events are anticipated but can’t yet be officially confirmed, such as what we’re experiencing in the current moment."

#Politics #USPolitics #InformationAsymmetry

https://www.msnbc.com/opinion/msnbc-opinion/trumps-potential-indictment-news-spun-liking-usual-rcna77101

What if I told you that Caicedo’s social media posts were written with Brighton’s blessing?? What if I told you a similar thing had been done with Mudryk, but .. for slightly different reasons … 🤔 🤔 🤔 #ArsenalFC #InformationAsymmetry #C6ISR

Very interesting research: https://homes.esat.kuleuven.be/~asenol/leaky-forms/

"Users' email addresses are exfiltrated to tracking, marketing and analytics domains before form submission and before giving consent"

-> yes, you read that right, before form submission.

This is an example of how the intransparency of the digital world leads to a huge #InformationAsymmetry between normal people and corporations.

Source: NOS
https://nos.nl/artikel/2428358-adverteerders-kijken-mee-als-je-online-je-e-mailadres-invult

The consequence is that under a capitalist system (and, to be fair, numerous others), higher significance is given to manifest short-term outcomes (both positive and negative), and lower significance to those which are non-manifest and/or long-term.

Keep in mind that this dynamic can apply to a single technology, e.g., hydroflourocarbons, asbestos, and leaded petrol, all of which afforded clear short-term advantages, but whose long-term severely deleterious effects were far harder to assess.

This is a fundamental failure of all market systems.

Information goods are inherently complex, non-manifest, and frequently have long- rather than short-term outcomes. So, yeah, VC-funded infotech startups tend to utterly fuck up this market, extract like hell on existing infrastructure, and massively underinvest in long-term goods.

(Which is to say, I've just restated your essay's conclusion, by a circuitous and different walk.)

(Oh, and that risk discussion I've sidelined is sort of encapsulated in the above, though of course it could be spelled out more clearly and concretely.)

@baldur #InformationFriction #InformationAsymmetry #capitalism #manifestation #technology

6/

@baldur Information asymmetries arise where one party to a transaction has more information than the other. Or, more often, each party has information unknown to the other, though in different areas.

This means that a key assumption of free and competitive markets is violated: equal access to information. One party is advantaged over the other. In at least part. The topic has been a fairly hot area of research since the 1950s, notably by Kenneth Arrow and George Akerloff (#MarketForLemons).

Information frictions affect both parties, and affect current awareness of long-term outcomes. The issue here is that neither side has a clear view of the ultimate benefit, or cost, of some decision.

This is fundamental to the intersection of economics and technology, because all technologies, as means to some ends, have multiple dimensions:

• Effects: positive and/or negative
• Timeframe: short and/or long
• Manifestation: high and/or low

"Manifestation" is a term I'm using to indicate how apparent an outcome is, near-equivalent terms are "latent vs. manifest funtions" (#RobertKMerton), "overt vs. covert", or "cognizability". A manifest outcome is one clearly perceived, a non-manifest outcome is one poorly perceived. Or understood, communicated, detected, etc.

#capitalism #InformationAsymmetry #InformationFriction

5/