Math, financialization of economy, and probability are things that are inherently difficult.

Contingency radically inhuman. Runs contrary to ideas of world as an orderly place and humans
as steering of destiny. No space outside of contingency. This runs against everything we understand
about agency. Change in world (becoming) to which we are a part of does not mean there is fate. Yet
not mechanistic. Human activity alters world, but we cannot control it. We can note changes and
alterations, but they do not matter. It is human nature to try and make sense of these, but this is not
possible.
Probability is odds of an outcome. All probabilistic assertions require that conditions are static
or limited. Reality must stand still. There are things that could not have been included that can happen.
Things can happen with things that have no relation to original conditions.
Epistemological conception of probability. With epistemology, there are ignorant problems
(ones that are easy to solve, like fixing model or adding variables; model or calculation doesn't know
something it should) and stupid problems that relate to naturalized epistemology (a permanent nature of
our epistemology; there are limits to our capacities of knowledge as human). Ayache thinks
epistemology is not the problem, but ontology is.
In Difference and Repetition, distinction between differentiation and differenciation.
Differenciation is the difference between two things (white is not black); difference between, difference
of identity; what one thing is, is what another is not. This implies things are different, not just are.
Deleuze looks at how oppressive it must be an identity, to be stable and different from something else.
He believes there is an essence of identity. Differentiation is the idea that things differ, and difference in
itself. Things differ (action) without being different itself. We undo identity all the time and are not
self-same. This is becoming.
Black swans are things you did not know to look for, and we can retroactively look at the
change something made. Ayache argues these are ignorant because it implies that if you looked hard
enough, you could find them. He reaffirms there are stupid problems. Ontologically, things are as
probabilistic as they are themselves. Change comes from within. Difference does not follow a statistical
law. It is whatever it is. No external law. This is a move away from probability towards contingency.
Tries to kill the idea of future as something that does not predict. This is not how nature works.
It isn't hard to predict, it is not predictable.
We cannot intersect two infinities, as they are not discrete sets (you can't ask an infinite of
people to move infinite spaces). Because neither is a number, it does not cut into reality. This is where
Cantor's limit comes from.
For Ayache, no discrete unit in infinite. Infinite argues there are infinite units/numbers. For
Ayache, there is no probability because there are no discrete units instead of infinite number of units.
Infinite does not have essence.
Risk can be independent. For derivatives you need to find markets that do not overlap with one
another.
Markets not inherently capitalist, but relational.
Future is a non-human project, but Ayache says the present is a human project. It is not, and it is
necessary to make sense of the present in a similar way.