CATEGORIES



ABOUT TALEBIBLIA

Talebiblia is a fan site devoted to Nassim Nicholas Taleb, created by Smiljana Skiba. It features a compilation of Taleb's most intriguing social media screenshots and interviews for readers to enjoy and explore. The website provides a resource for anyone looking to gain insights into Taleb's works, whether they are a dedicated reader or a curious newcomer.

Please note that Talebiblia is an independent website and is not affiliated with Nassim Nicholas Taleb in any manner.

Many thanks to Lucia Simeoni and Ashok Atluri for their invaluable assistance in creating and maintaining this website.

To stay up to date with Talebiblia's latest developments, follow Smiljana on Twitter @MasaSkiba

Something UK modelers (idiots) did not get with hospitalization that we traders and modelers in nonlinearities have know since (1997): The market is a large movie theater with a small door. Same for hospital capacity. Gabish? Same with insurance models. Loss from hurricanes aren’t what you think are losses from hurricanes, even if your estimate of the intensity is correct. Why? Because the costs of the material goes up nonlinearly owing to (conditional) excess demand.

Ioannidis got the reasoning completely BACKWARD. I mean reallllllly backward. In the real world, one must REDUCE RISK in the absence of reliable data, via the MOST ROBUST (model resistant) method. That’s the message of the INCERTO. The reason: Ioannidis understands the defects of models used in Medicine at 1st order, but doesn’t understand 2nd order effects/asymmetries. Being an academic, he doesn’t understand decision-making under uncertainty & which decision is harmed LESS from model error. #RWRI

UK NUDGE UNIT 1) Just as before the crisis of 2008-9 I was shouting that economic “experts” were no experts, we will sorely discover that behavioral “experts” are even more unreliable. 2) Even psychs admit behavioral papers replicate <½, that is the reliability of astrology. 3) You don't board a plane w/safety w/p-value of .05 (likely to be miscomputed). If they used their "scientific" approach to risk management no pilot would be alive today. Risk require much more reliability than "evidence based" methods which are backward-looking & flawed.