Category Archives: Contributors

When Nassim Taleb Attacks – Forbes

Were he not so convinced of my evilness, Taleb might even have allowed himself to like this paper which shows that evidence that some economists are better at forecasting than others is largely due to random sampling error (so yes, people are fooled by randomness …)

I will report back on the severe mathematical scrutiny as soon as I hear anything.

For now, I’m off to get ready for teaching, including discussing this paper by Ricardo Caballero with my MA class. Titled “Macroeconomics after the Crisis: Time to Deal with the Pretense-of-Knowledge Syndrome” it critiques the fake precision of modern mathematical macroeconomic models. It’s one of my favorite papers.

via When Nassim Taleb Attacks – Forbes.

Edge Perspectives with John Hagel: Getting Stronger through Stress: Making Black Swans Work for You

In this context, his perspective is very consistent with the critique of modern push systems that I (and my co-authors) developed in The Power of Pull. Push systems are driven by two concerns: the ability to forecast or predict events and the quest for increasing efficiency by designing systems that are highly standardized and tightly specified to remove any unnecessary activity – everything is arranged to be in the right place at the right time to meet anticipated demand. Scalable efficiency is the ultimate goal.

Virtually all of our contemporary institutions – firms, educational institutions and government – have been designed as push systems. While these systems tend to prosper in highly stable times, they do very poorly in times of rapid change and growing uncertainty. They become highly vulnerable to Black Swans, setting cascades and avalanches into motion that amplify and extend the disruptive effects of the initial event. By seeking to remove unpredictability, we are actually becoming more fragile. As Taleb observes: “When you are fragile, you depend on things following the exact planned course, with as little deviation as possible – for deviations are more harmful than helpful. This is why the fragile needs to be very predictive in its approach, and, conversely, predictive systems cause fragility.”

via Edge Perspectives with John Hagel: Getting Stronger through Stress: Making Black Swans Work for You.

The importance of being antifragile | Bjørn Stærk

Antifragility is the opposite of this, a condition where the potential downside is limited, but the upside is unlimited. A situation where things will probably go badly, but only a little badly, and in the best case they will go really well. An everyday example is that you ask someone out for a date. The worst, and most likely, outcome is that they decline, which is sad but no disaster. But the best outcome is that you will find someone to spend the rest of your life with.
Or let’s say you write a novel. The worst, and most likely, outcome is that you will have wasted your time, because nobody wants to read it. Again, this is sad, but no disaster. You’ve lost time and effort, but it is a limited loss. But the best possible outcome is practically unlimited: That you will have written the next Harry Potter or Fifty Shades of Grey.
Antifragility is frightening, but the fact that the downside is more probable is outweighed by the fact that the upside is so wonderful.

via The importance of being antifragile | Bjørn Stærk.

Stragegy to deal with academic smear campaign…

Stragegy to deal with academic smear campaign and figure detect technical mistakes in my work, or substantive problems with it.

1) Find academics who are commenting on Antifragile and TBS with bitterness, and possible envy.

2) Send them academic version of backup work (which is referenced in books and they should have read before commenting).

3) Make them produce technical comments on flaws (they are spreading damaging information after all). If they find mistakes, I am a winner as I can improve the works. If they can’t produce a technical comment on a remark which they made using their status *as academic*, then they are in trouble, for an academic is not a journalist and is supposed to not produce pure bullshit or shout his incompetence publicly. Anything an academic writes on a public domain is there for life.

I am fed up with academics who bullshit about my work without engaging substantive issues with it. I want my core points to be engaged.

Let us see the result with one Teppo Fillin. Who knows we might learn something. https://twitter.com/teppofelin

via Stragegy to deal… | Facebook.

IAm Nassim Taleb, author of Antifragile, AMA : IAmA

top 200 comments
sorted by:best[–]
vfp15 61 points 13 days ago
Are there cases where Skin-In-The-Game is the wrong heuristic?Should judges, jurors, and prosecutors have skin in the game?Also, the whole idea behind corporations “personnes morales” in French is to remove skin from the game. This has made possible large scale enterprises. Isn’t this a good thing?And thanks for a great book! Vincent Poirier, Quebec City
nntaleb[S] 66 points 13 days agoSkin in the game is about being harmed by an error if it harms others. Managers of large corporations can be forced to lose money beyond their compensation should the firm suffer. As to judges, I don’t know, but hopefully they have sufficient eye contact to suffer shame.
JedTrott 48 points 13 days ago
Shouldn’t there be some sort of heuristic about whether or not the person has an incentive to expose others to risk for his own benefit. A juror has no skin in the game, except a sense of civic duty, but it is not concerning because they also have no benefit for wrongfully convicting or acquitting.
nntaleb[S] 93 points 13 days agoExcellent. I have to take a long walk and think about it… The fact that the juror has no upside mitigates the problem.

via IAm Nassim Taleb, author of Antifragile, AMA : IAmA.