What a treat. A full hour of NNT discussing Antifragile.
Audio Only
Authors@Google Presents: Nassim Nicholas Taleb
Leave a reply
Friends, thanks to your help with the post here…
Friends, thanks to your help with the post here, I refined my public call/supplication for more skin in the game in 2013. But look at the irony!
http://www.project-syndicate.org/focus/2012-year-end-series
via Friends, thanks to….
More Skin in the Game in 2013 by Nassim Nicholas Taleb – Project Syndicate
I tell people what I have in my portfolio, not what I predict; that way, I will be the first to be harmed. It is not ethical to drag people into these exposures without incurring the risk of losses. In my book Antifragile, I tell people what I do, not what they should do, to the great irritation of the literary critics. I do so not for autobiographical reasons, but only because the other approach would not be ethical.
Finally, there are warmongers. To deal with them, the onetime consumer advocate and former US presidential candidate Ralph Nader has proposed that those who vote in favor of war should place themselves or a descendent into military service.
One can only hope that something will be done in 2013 to implement some skin in the game heuristics. A safe and just society demands nothing less.
via More Skin in the Game in 2013 by Nassim Nicholas Taleb – Project Syndicate.
Tim Cohn “Reston Runner”‘s review of Antifragile: Things That Gain from Disorder | Amazon.com
5.0 out of 5 stars Fascinating!, January 3, 2013
By Tim Cohn “Reston Runner”
This review is from: Antifragile: Things That Gain from Disorder (Kindle Edition)
This is a brilliant piece of original work, and, predictably, it seems to infuriate many readers. Why? Mostly, I think, because Taleb’s observations are deadly accurate and he takes a particular delight in ruthlessly pointing out the cluelessness of most academics when it comes to understanding how complicated systems really work — how real systems not only survive adversity but in fact depend on it. Why does any of this matter? Because, whether we like it or not, we exist in a universe of complicated systems — all forms of life, the atmosphere, the oceans, tectonic plates, the solar system — and when we fail to acknowledge this and its implications, we tend to devise “cures” that are worse than the so-called “diseases.” In a grand sense, the future of our society depends on understanding this book’s message; at a smaller level, the book ensures you will have something interesting to talk about at your next cocktail party.
via Amazon.com: Tim Cohn “Reston Runner”‘s review of Antifragile: Things That Gain from Disorder.
WHY NOT TO ENGAGE IN STANDARD DEBATES/FOLLOW NEWS
WHY NOT TO ENGAGE IN STANDARD DEBATES/FOLLOW NEWS (LESS IS MORE, or “It is not the quantity but the *quality* of arguments that matters”). This graph shows the relative role of independent factors in a system, with among, say 30 identifiable factors, 97% of the variations can be attributed to the first 2 factors (a system with “fat tails” will be even more concentrated with 99.999% coming from one single factor). The remaining 28 factors are chickens**t. The graph presents a statistical view of the “less is more” argument, and why one should not follow the news for, in a given month, “low loads” represent 99.99% of the conversation and .01% of the contribution.
If you are right on factor 1 (& possibly 2), the rest is irrelevant. But the problem is that those trained in debate will drag you into factors 3 through 99, just to distract from the core issue.
I have decided to avoid Cambridge and Oxford Union debates, those discussion with people trained in argument by debating societies. The Oxbridge system of “covering all sides of an issue” drives you to the irrelevant and drowns your Factor 1 argument. If you do things right you should have “only one argument”, which clashes with this culture.
(This graph also explains in statistical terms the “lady complains too much”, or why a “balanced” view presenting drawbacks is everything but balanced.)
