The FIRST book Review. The guy got it.
http://www.fooledbyrandomness.com/EdSmith.pdf
If you’re a The Times subscriber, you can read the review here.
via The FIRST book… | Facebook.
The FIRST book Review. The guy got it.
http://www.fooledbyrandomness.com/EdSmith.pdf
If you’re a The Times subscriber, you can read the review here.
via The FIRST book… | Facebook.
A 3 sentence rebuttal of a >2000 words piece by Pinker.
http://www.fooledbyrandomness.com/pinkerrebuttal.pdf
And the 3 sentences:
Pinker’s Rebuttal of My Note
Nassim Nicholas Taleb
Pinker has written a rebuttal (ad hominem blather, if he had a point he would have written something 13 of my comment, not 3 x the words). He
still does not understand the difference between probability and expectation (drop in observed volatility/fluctualtion ¹≠ drop in risk) or the incompatibility of his claims with his acceptance of fat tails (he does not understand asymmetries from his posts on FB and private correspon- dence). Yet it was Pinker who said “what is the actual risk for any individual? It is approaching zero”.
Friends, for discussion. I am collaborating with Scott Atran on a piece debunking the LONG PEACE argument. Here are my points.
Extreme Value Theory: Fughetaboudit
Recently updated.
Abstract: We provide a mathematical definition of fragility and antifragility as negative or positive sensitivity to a semi-measure of dispersion and volatility a variant of negative or positive “vega” and examine the link to nonlinear effects. We integrate model error and biases into the fragile or antifragile context. Unlike risk, which is linked to psychological notions such as subjective preferences (hence cannot apply to a coffee cup we offer a measure that is universal and concerns any object that has a probability distribution whether such distribution is known or, critically, unknown).
We propose a detection of fragility, robustness, and antifragility using a single “fast-and-frugal”, model-free, probability free heuristic that also picks up exposure to model error. The heuristic lends itself to immediate implementation, and uncovers hidden risks related to company size, forecasting problems, and bank tail exposures it explains the forecasting biases. While simple to implement, it outperforms stress testing and other such methods such as Value-at-Risk.