tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5764290.post4206853632956031489..comments2024-03-18T07:00:59.438-04:00Comments on Rebecca Tushnet's 43(B)log: WIPIP part 4Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5764290.post-26164654298360841972012-02-13T16:06:04.359-05:002012-02-13T16:06:04.359-05:00Eric: I respect your norm entrepreneurship! I jus...Eric: I respect your norm entrepreneurship! I just think that existing norms complicate the effeciency analysis in a variety of ways.<br /><br />And I do appreciate that you practice what you preach! It is indeed always gratifying to hear that my notes are of use. Though, to be honest, I'd probably blog anyway as long as I wasn't actively suffering significant detriments from it.Rebecca Tushnethttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17344226000864611148noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5764290.post-47526361136059566212012-02-13T15:58:16.040-05:002012-02-13T15:58:16.040-05:00Thanks for the feedback, Rebecca. For the record, ...Thanks for the feedback, Rebecca. For the record, I completely agree it's a marginal contribution -- I do not mean to claim anything more. The reason for talking about the size of the overkill losses is to give a rough idea of how much inefficiency there is out there to mine. That in turn suggests that even a very modest success with a project such as konomark (or any another) could contribute a lot of value. E.g., even picking up one one-thousandth of a few trillion would still be a few billion! If konomark could pick up just <i>one-thousandth of one-thousandth</i> of overkill losses, I'd be wildly happy!<br /><br />Thanks also, in a more general sense, for all the notes you take of presentations at conferences. It's a great record to have.Eric E. Johnsonhttp://ericejohnson.comnoreply@blogger.com