This video centers on Hayek’s definition of a solved Vienna Problem:
“The conditions which the solution of this optimum problem must satisfy have been fully worked out and can be stated best in mathematical form: put at their briefest, they are that the marginal rates of substitution between any two commodities or factors must be the same in all their different uses.”
Hayek’s reference to “marginal rates of substitution” would seem to take the availability of production and utility functions for granted as the boundary conditions for solving Mises’ calculation problem. (And, indeed, creating empirically meaningful production functions has been going on for a long time.)
Noting that “our only exogenous references are the same as Hayek’s” the authors of this video then locate your “tacit knowledge” in the shapes of production and utility tradeoffs:
“The plethora of physical and financial data needed to perform economic calculation is already there in the boundary conditions through which Hayek perceived the calculation problem.”
The interesting disconnect with Austrianism is that these guys go on to demonstrate the validity of their premises through desktop prototypes that perform artificial economic calculation, e.g.:
The point of view established here is that economic computation is simply what an unencumbered economy does, irrespective of anyone’s “insurmountable problem[s] of epistemology”. And, if there are such creatures as economists, then they should be distinguished by having created analogs to what this economic gizmo does.
As a point of further interest, one might consider that this intelligent economic robot has beguiled some potent practitioners of economic command:
I would be interested in a considered Austrian response to this treatment of Hayek’s 1945 paper . . .
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9h8bIIfIoR0
. . . which I will introduce as follows.
This video centers on Hayek’s definition of a solved Vienna Problem:
“The conditions which the solution of this optimum problem must satisfy have been fully worked out and can be stated best in mathematical form: put at their briefest, they are that the marginal rates of substitution between any two commodities or factors must be the same in all their different uses.”
Hayek’s reference to “marginal rates of substitution” would seem to take the availability of production and utility functions for granted as the boundary conditions for solving Mises’ calculation problem. (And, indeed, creating empirically meaningful production functions has been going on for a long time.)
Noting that “our only exogenous references are the same as Hayek’s” the authors of this video then locate your “tacit knowledge” in the shapes of production and utility tradeoffs:
“The plethora of physical and financial data needed to perform economic calculation is already there in the boundary conditions through which Hayek perceived the calculation problem.”
The interesting disconnect with Austrianism is that these guys go on to demonstrate the validity of their premises through desktop prototypes that perform artificial economic calculation, e.g.:
http://www.sfecon.com/YouTube%20Demo.xlsm
The point of view established here is that economic computation is simply what an unencumbered economy does, irrespective of anyone’s “insurmountable problem[s] of epistemology”. And, if there are such creatures as economists, then they should be distinguished by having created analogs to what this economic gizmo does.
As a point of further interest, one might consider that this intelligent economic robot has beguiled some potent practitioners of economic command:
https://onedrive.live.com/?authkey=%21AFs7Dqeqw1xjL6U&id=EA68D02ADD8A675D%211220&cid=EA68D02ADD8A675D&parId=root&parQt=sharedby&o=OneUp