5 ms·

Taleb is an idiot: https://twitter.com/sapinker/status/682361866321002496 https://twitter.com/sapinker/status/682361866321002496

nicky0 11y ago
I love how Taleb makes people so angry that they rush to denigrate him. This in itself illustrates many of his points. Most of the links posted here are people with a personal axe to grind or a vested interest in silencing him.
Plough_Jogger 11y ago
Agreed.
skolos 11y ago
I'm pretty sure that you comment is down-voted due to choice of words. Taleb is a snake oil salesman and other than catchy term "black swan" his words should be ignored as much as possible. There are many blog posts on web that go into details to prove this. In addition to the above link, here is another set of links: http://theweek.com/articles/453558/nassim-taleb-used-hero-but-today-hes-just-plain-wrong http://theweek.com/articles/453558/nassim-taleb-used-hero-bu... http://www.cnbc.com/id/31386309 http://www.cnbc.com/id/31386309 https://scottlocklin.wordpress.com/2009/07/17/nassim-taleb-clown-of-quantitative-finance/ https://scottlocklin.wordpress.com/2009/07/17/nassim-taleb-c... https://www.geneticliteracyproject.org/2014/11/03/is-nassim-taleb-a-dangerous-imbecile-or-just-on-the-pay-of-the-anti-gmo-mafia/ https://www.geneticliteracyproject.org/2014/11/03/is-nassim-...
- eruditely 11y ago
  Taleb is not at all a "snake oil" salesman, he is very great. ) very much cited https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=64BtMdsAAAAJ&hl=en https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=64BtMdsAAAAJ&hl=en ) http://www.fooledbyrandomness.com/FatTails.html http://www.fooledbyrandomness.com/FatTails.html <-- Silent Risk https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8nhAlfIk3QIR1o1dnk5ZmRaaGs/view https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8nhAlfIk3QIR1o1dnk5ZmRaaGs... ) http://www.fooledbyrandomness.com/pp2.pdf http://www.fooledbyrandomness.com/pp2.pdf probability theory is the theory for dealing with what we do not know, and that's what his criticism of GMO's and such are based off, it's a rigorous field. His paper on Pinker's work was accepted into a peer reviewed journal. So it's not by any means "outlandish". Cirillo P., Taleb N.N., 2015. On the statistical properties and tail risk of violent conflicts. ) Daniel Kahneman probably the most celebrated intellectual/scientist of this specific modern era calls for his inclusion among the world's top 100 intellectuals https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MMBclvY_EMA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MMBclvY_EMA Not to mention, you know, actually predicting the financial crisis of 08 in print? Those were just articles that people get when they're in the limelight and have positions that are hard to follow. It's just dishonest to criticize him like that.
- jessaustin 11y ago
  The "Precautionary Principle" nonsense has always been my least favorite aspect of Taleb's shtick. You're asking too much of Taleb, however. It is not his place to be right all the time. Rather, he must always point out how often those in charge are wrong. That is how he can contribute to the progress of humanity.
Eifoov7h 11y ago
Oh please. There are much better links for showing that. https://archive.is/7Bjqc https://archive.is/7Bjqc
- eruditely 11y ago
  This comment does not pass the principle of charity. You can't just take one isolated comment from twitter and use it as evidence against him. Twitter is supposed to be a place where you're able to share anything quickly. Here's a good aggregate measure of his influence. https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=64BtMdsAAAAJ&hl=en https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=64BtMdsAAAAJ&hl=en Below is a linked technical book vol1 of Silent Risk. Which definitely demonstrates his abilities. https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8nhAlfIk3QIR1o1dnk5ZmRaaGs/view https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8nhAlfIk3QIR1o1dnk5ZmRaaGs...
  - Eifoov7h 11y ago
    That's a classic motte-and-bailey doctrine right there. It shows Taleb commenting on a topic he clearly knows nothing about while presenting himself as an expert. Something, if I recall correctly, he often criticises in other people. And it's not merely being imprecise, it's at least halfway between being wrong and not even wrong. If someone's that sloppy on Twitter, why would their research be any better? It probably isn't. In a series of tweets posted around the same time, Taleb also pointed to a "technical" paper claiming a connection between P versus NP and the effects of GMOs [1]. It's drivel. A series of non-sequiturs. No connection is actually established, only claimed. I credit that paper only with relieving me of the dilemma of whether Taleb is an interesting thinker or just another crackpot. (And I'm not even a GMO enthusiast.) The tweets are now gone; I only found this archive.is link because it was posted to a mathematics cranks subreddit. Probably because these were too obvious of an embarrassment to him. Fine. Though I think Taleb also likes to talk about "courage" a lot... Taleb's other "technical" papers are not particularly impressive either. I find them completely inscrutable; Taleb never explains his notation or terminology, and I often have a hard time deciphering equations he writes. While this may be because of my rather modest background in statistics, I'm sure it could be possible to make them more accessible. Take Laszlo Babai's paper on graph isomorphism in quasipolynomial time [2]: all you have to know in advance to understand it is some basic vocabulary of graph theory and algebra, and you can readily find them even on Wikipedia. He lays out definitions clearly and even goes as far as as presenting Latin equivalents of Fraktur letters (I wouldn't bother). Taleb seems more interested in establishing profundity by obscurity (what Charles Seife calls "proofiness"), like some kind of post-modernist philosopher. Come to think of it, Taleb seems very much like one. (I know I'm being trolled, but...) [1] http://www.fooledbyrandomness.com/PPAlgo2.pdf http://www.fooledbyrandomness.com/PPAlgo2.pdf [2] http://arxiv.org/abs/1512.03547v1 http://arxiv.org/abs/1512.03547v1
murbard2 11y ago
As much as Taleb's attitude and lack of manners are annoying, he does have a point and the article quoted by Pinker fails to get it. For instance: "To a normal person, the statement ‘terrorism kills far fewer people than falls from ladders’ means a purely factual statement about the number of casualties over a specified period in the past. " No, it really doesn't. The whole point of these statements is to hint at latent properties, not merely to report historical records.

nicky0 11y ago

I love how Taleb makes people so angry that they rush to denigrate him. This in itself illustrates many of his points. Most of the links posted here are people with a personal axe to grind or a vested interest in silencing him.

Plough_Jogger 11y ago

Agreed.

skolos 11y ago

I'm pretty sure that you comment is down-voted due to choice of words. Taleb is a snake oil salesman and other than catchy term "black swan" his words should be ignored as much as possible. There are many blog posts on web that go into details to prove this. In addition to the above link, here is another set of links: http://theweek.com/articles/453558/nassim-taleb-used-hero-but-today-hes-just-plain-wrong http://theweek.com/articles/453558/nassim-taleb-used-hero-bu... http://www.cnbc.com/id/31386309 http://www.cnbc.com/id/31386309 https://scottlocklin.wordpress.com/2009/07/17/nassim-taleb-clown-of-quantitative-finance/ https://scottlocklin.wordpress.com/2009/07/17/nassim-taleb-c... https://www.geneticliteracyproject.org/2014/11/03/is-nassim-taleb-a-dangerous-imbecile-or-just-on-the-pay-of-the-anti-gmo-mafia/ https://www.geneticliteracyproject.org/2014/11/03/is-nassim-...

eruditely 11y ago
Taleb is not at all a "snake oil" salesman, he is very great. ) very much cited https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=64BtMdsAAAAJ&hl=en https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=64BtMdsAAAAJ&hl=en ) http://www.fooledbyrandomness.com/FatTails.html http://www.fooledbyrandomness.com/FatTails.html <-- Silent Risk https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8nhAlfIk3QIR1o1dnk5ZmRaaGs/view https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8nhAlfIk3QIR1o1dnk5ZmRaaGs... ) http://www.fooledbyrandomness.com/pp2.pdf http://www.fooledbyrandomness.com/pp2.pdf probability theory is the theory for dealing with what we do not know, and that's what his criticism of GMO's and such are based off, it's a rigorous field. His paper on Pinker's work was accepted into a peer reviewed journal. So it's not by any means "outlandish". Cirillo P., Taleb N.N., 2015. On the statistical properties and tail risk of violent conflicts. ) Daniel Kahneman probably the most celebrated intellectual/scientist of this specific modern era calls for his inclusion among the world's top 100 intellectuals https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MMBclvY_EMA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MMBclvY_EMA Not to mention, you know, actually predicting the financial crisis of 08 in print? Those were just articles that people get when they're in the limelight and have positions that are hard to follow. It's just dishonest to criticize him like that.
jessaustin 11y ago
The "Precautionary Principle" nonsense has always been my least favorite aspect of Taleb's shtick. You're asking too much of Taleb, however. It is not his place to be right all the time. Rather, he must always point out how often those in charge are wrong. That is how he can contribute to the progress of humanity.

Eifoov7h 11y ago

Oh please. There are much better links for showing that. https://archive.is/7Bjqc https://archive.is/7Bjqc

eruditely 11y ago
This comment does not pass the principle of charity. You can't just take one isolated comment from twitter and use it as evidence against him. Twitter is supposed to be a place where you're able to share anything quickly. Here's a good aggregate measure of his influence. https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=64BtMdsAAAAJ&hl=en https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=64BtMdsAAAAJ&hl=en Below is a linked technical book vol1 of Silent Risk. Which definitely demonstrates his abilities. https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8nhAlfIk3QIR1o1dnk5ZmRaaGs/view https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8nhAlfIk3QIR1o1dnk5ZmRaaGs...
- Eifoov7h 11y ago
  That's a classic motte-and-bailey doctrine right there. It shows Taleb commenting on a topic he clearly knows nothing about while presenting himself as an expert. Something, if I recall correctly, he often criticises in other people. And it's not merely being imprecise, it's at least halfway between being wrong and not even wrong. If someone's that sloppy on Twitter, why would their research be any better? It probably isn't. In a series of tweets posted around the same time, Taleb also pointed to a "technical" paper claiming a connection between P versus NP and the effects of GMOs [1]. It's drivel. A series of non-sequiturs. No connection is actually established, only claimed. I credit that paper only with relieving me of the dilemma of whether Taleb is an interesting thinker or just another crackpot. (And I'm not even a GMO enthusiast.) The tweets are now gone; I only found this archive.is link because it was posted to a mathematics cranks subreddit. Probably because these were too obvious of an embarrassment to him. Fine. Though I think Taleb also likes to talk about "courage" a lot... Taleb's other "technical" papers are not particularly impressive either. I find them completely inscrutable; Taleb never explains his notation or terminology, and I often have a hard time deciphering equations he writes. While this may be because of my rather modest background in statistics, I'm sure it could be possible to make them more accessible. Take Laszlo Babai's paper on graph isomorphism in quasipolynomial time [2]: all you have to know in advance to understand it is some basic vocabulary of graph theory and algebra, and you can readily find them even on Wikipedia. He lays out definitions clearly and even goes as far as as presenting Latin equivalents of Fraktur letters (I wouldn't bother). Taleb seems more interested in establishing profundity by obscurity (what Charles Seife calls "proofiness"), like some kind of post-modernist philosopher. Come to think of it, Taleb seems very much like one. (I know I'm being trolled, but...) [1] http://www.fooledbyrandomness.com/PPAlgo2.pdf http://www.fooledbyrandomness.com/PPAlgo2.pdf [2] http://arxiv.org/abs/1512.03547v1 http://arxiv.org/abs/1512.03547v1

murbard2 11y ago

As much as Taleb's attitude and lack of manners are annoying, he does have a point and the article quoted by Pinker fails to get it. For instance: "To a normal person, the statement ‘terrorism kills far fewer people than falls from ladders’ means a purely factual statement about the number of casualties over a specified period in the past. " No, it really doesn't. The whole point of these statements is to hint at latent properties, not merely to report historical records.