Sublime

that, contrary to standard belief, the market shares of many technology companies could be predicted with great accuracy, even if the underlying changes in technology changed frequently.

It traditionally assumed that firms were independent, and so changes would be independent, and so their sizes and aggregate effects would be distributed normally.

publicly visible.

Each company is trying to figure out how to strategize, how much to invest, what the technology should be. In a case like that, it’s not at equilibrium.

One is the neoclassical rational-choice-equilibrium argument that markets automatically come to the Pareto optimal equilibrium for society. This was Ken Arrow and Debreu’s great work. The second is more out of the Hayekian tradition, that markets are efficient at processing distributed information to help coordinate activity in the economy. But bot

in the real world, there is no such thing as an externality.

These are all highly contestable statements.

no more need to have them enforce our contracts.