andrew_gelman_stats andrew_gelman_stats-2010 andrew_gelman_stats-2010-392 knowledge-graph by maker-knowledge-mining

392 andrew gelman stats-2010-11-03-Taleb + 3.5 years


meta infos for this blog

Source: html

Introduction: I recently had the occasion to reread my review of The Black Swan, from April 2007. It was fun reading my review (and also this pre-review ; “nothing useful escapes from a blackbody,” indeed). It was like a greatest hits of all my pet ideas that I’ve never published. Looking back, I realize that Taleb really was right about a lot of things. Now that the financial crisis has happened, we tend to forget that the experts who Taleb bashes were not always reasonable at all. Here’s what I wrote in my review, three and a half years ago: On page 19, Taleb refers to the usual investment strategy (which I suppose I actually use myself) as “picking pennies in front of a steamroller.” That’s a cute phrase; did he come up with it? I’m also reminded of the famous Martingale betting system. Several years ago in a university library I came across a charming book by Maxim (of gun fame) where he went through chapter after chapter demolishing the Martingale system. (For those who don’t kno


Summary: the most important sentenses genereted by tfidf model

sentIndex sentText sentNum sentScore

1 I recently had the occasion to reread my review of The Black Swan, from April 2007. [sent-1, score-0.181]

2 It was fun reading my review (and also this pre-review ; “nothing useful escapes from a blackbody,” indeed). [sent-2, score-0.12]

3 Here’s what I wrote in my review, three and a half years ago: On page 19, Taleb refers to the usual investment strategy (which I suppose I actually use myself) as “picking pennies in front of a steamroller. [sent-6, score-0.664]

4 (For those who don’t know, the Martingale system is to bet $1, then if you lose, bet $2, then if you lose, bet $4, etc. [sent-10, score-0.424]

5 You’re then guaranteed to win exactly $1–or lose your entire fortune. [sent-11, score-0.141]

6 ”) Throughout, Taleb talks about forecasters who aren’t so good at forecasting, picking pennies in front of steamrollers, etc. [sent-13, score-0.455]

7 They have an incentive to ignore those black swans, since others will pick up the tab when they fail (sort of like FEMA pays for those beachfront houses in Florida). [sent-16, score-0.248]

8 It reminds me of the saying that I heard once (referring to Donald Trump, I believe) that what matters is not your net worth (assets minus liabilities), but the absolute value of your net worth. [sent-17, score-0.17]

9 Being in debt for $10 million and thus being “too big to fail” is (almost) equivalent to having $10 million in the bank. [sent-18, score-0.124]

10 As noted in the above quote, I was using the much-derided “picking pennies in front of a steamroller” investment strategy myself–and I knew it! [sent-23, score-0.534]

11 I trust my doctor and dentist completely, and I’ll invest my money wherever the conventional wisdom tells me to (just like the people whom Taleb disparages on page 290 of his book). [sent-26, score-0.239]

12 Not long after, there was a stock market crash and I lost half my money. [sent-27, score-0.127]

13 Still, what was I thinking–I read Taleb’s book and still didn’t get the point! [sent-29, score-0.126]

14 I recall going on the computer to access my investment account but I couldn’t remember the password, was too busy to call and get it, and then forgot about it. [sent-31, score-0.187]

15 I’d be going around saying, yeah, I’m a statistician, I read Taleb’s book and I thought it through, blah blah blah. [sent-35, score-0.271]

16 All in all, it was probably better for me to just lose the money and maintain a healthy humility about my investment expertise. [sent-36, score-0.492]

17 From the General Social Survey cumulative file, here’s the crosstab of the responses to “Abortion if woman wants for any reason” and “Favor or oppose death penalty for murder”: 40% supported abortion for any reason. [sent-39, score-0.604]

18 60% did not support abortion under all conditions. [sent-41, score-0.199]

19 Finally, a lot of people bash Taleb, partly for his idosyncratic writing style, but I have fond memories of both his books, for their own sake and because they inspired me to write down some of my pet ideas. [sent-44, score-0.211]

20 Also, he deserves full credit for getting things right several years ago, back when the Larry Summerses of the world were still floating on air, buoyed by the heads-I-win, tails-you-lose system that kept the bubble inflated for so long. [sent-45, score-0.196]


similar blogs computed by tfidf model

tfidf for this blog:

wordName wordTfidf (topN-words)

[('taleb', 0.539), ('martingale', 0.212), ('abortion', 0.199), ('investment', 0.187), ('pennies', 0.175), ('lose', 0.141), ('review', 0.12), ('bet', 0.117), ('fail', 0.115), ('death', 0.114), ('picking', 0.114), ('supported', 0.109), ('front', 0.108), ('money', 0.103), ('blah', 0.102), ('pet', 0.095), ('cumulative', 0.094), ('deterministic', 0.092), ('oppose', 0.088), ('net', 0.085), ('capital', 0.085), ('file', 0.077), ('system', 0.073), ('page', 0.072), ('yeah', 0.07), ('black', 0.069), ('market', 0.069), ('book', 0.067), ('buoyed', 0.064), ('disparages', 0.064), ('elimination', 0.064), ('maxim', 0.064), ('password', 0.064), ('steamroller', 0.064), ('tab', 0.064), ('trump', 0.064), ('unity', 0.064), ('strategy', 0.064), ('favor', 0.062), ('million', 0.062), ('humility', 0.061), ('reread', 0.061), ('still', 0.059), ('forecasters', 0.058), ('fond', 0.058), ('bash', 0.058), ('underground', 0.058), ('half', 0.058), ('screamed', 0.056), ('swan', 0.056)]

similar blogs list:

simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle

same-blog 1 0.99999994 392 andrew gelman stats-2010-11-03-Taleb + 3.5 years

Introduction: I recently had the occasion to reread my review of The Black Swan, from April 2007. It was fun reading my review (and also this pre-review ; “nothing useful escapes from a blackbody,” indeed). It was like a greatest hits of all my pet ideas that I’ve never published. Looking back, I realize that Taleb really was right about a lot of things. Now that the financial crisis has happened, we tend to forget that the experts who Taleb bashes were not always reasonable at all. Here’s what I wrote in my review, three and a half years ago: On page 19, Taleb refers to the usual investment strategy (which I suppose I actually use myself) as “picking pennies in front of a steamroller.” That’s a cute phrase; did he come up with it? I’m also reminded of the famous Martingale betting system. Several years ago in a university library I came across a charming book by Maxim (of gun fame) where he went through chapter after chapter demolishing the Martingale system. (For those who don’t kno

2 0.35732469 2297 andrew gelman stats-2014-04-20-Fooled by randomness

Introduction: From 2006 : Naseem Taleb ‘s publisher sent me a copy of “Fooled by randomness: the hidden role of chance in life and the markets” to review. It’s an important topic, and the book is written in a charming style—I’ll try to respond in kind, with some miscellaneous comments. On the cover of the book is a blurb, “Named by Fortune one of the smartest books of all time.” But Taleb instructs us on page 161-162 to ignore book reviews because of selection bias (the mediocre reviews don’t make it to the book cover). Books vs. articles I prefer writing books to writing journal articles because books are written for the reader (and also, in the case of textbooks, for the teacher), whereas articles are written for referees. Taleb definitely seems to be writing to the reader, not the referee. There is risk in book-writing, since in some ways referees are the ideal audience of experts, but I enjoy the freedom in book-writing of being able to say what I really think. Variation and rando

3 0.33808401 278 andrew gelman stats-2010-09-15-Advice that might make sense for individuals but is negative-sum overall

Introduction: There’s a lot of free advice out there. As I wrote a couple years ago, it’s usually presented as advice to individuals, but it’s also interesting to consider the possible total effects if the advice is taken. For example, Nassim Taleb has a webpage that includes a bunch of one-line bits of advice (scroll to item 132 on the linked page). Here’s his final piece of advice: If you dislike someone, leave him alone or eliminate him; don’t attack him verbally. I’m a big Taleb fan (search this blog to see), but this seems like classic negative-sum advice. I can see how it can be a good individual strategy to keep your mouth shut, bide your time, and then sandbag your enemies. But it can’t be good if lots of people are doing this. Verbal attacks are great, as long as there’s a chance to respond. I’ve been in environments where people follow Taleb’s advice, saying nothing and occasionally trying to “eliminate” people, and it’s not pretty. I much prefer for people to be open

4 0.16608186 2024 andrew gelman stats-2013-09-15-Swiss Jonah Lehrer update

Introduction: Nassim Taleb adds this link to the Dobelli story . I’m confused. I thought Swiss dudes were supposed to plagiarize their own stuff, not rip off other people’s. Whassup with that?

5 0.11274959 719 andrew gelman stats-2011-05-19-Everything is Obvious (once you know the answer)

Introduction: Duncan Watts gave his new book the above title, reflecting his irritation with those annoying people who, upon hearing of the latest social science research, reply with: Duh-I-knew-that. (I don’t know how to say Duh in Australian; maybe someone can translate that for me?) I, like Duncan, am easily irritated, and I looked forward to reading the book. I enjoyed it a lot, even though it has only one graph, and that graph has a problem with its y-axis. (OK, the book also has two diagrams and a graph of fake data, but that doesn’t count.) Before going on, let me say that I agree wholeheartedly with Duncan’s central point: social science research findings are often surprising, but the best results cause us to rethink our world in such a way that they seem completely obvious, in retrospect. (Don Rubin used to tell us that there’s no such thing as a “paradox”: once you fully understand a phenomenon, it should not seem paradoxical any more. When learning science, we sometimes speak

6 0.1114287 2021 andrew gelman stats-2013-09-13-Swiss Jonah Lehrer

7 0.10647119 962 andrew gelman stats-2011-10-17-Death!

8 0.1036538 170 andrew gelman stats-2010-07-29-When is expertise relevant?

9 0.10209492 348 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-17-Joanne Gowa scooped me by 22 years in my criticism of Axelrod’s Evolution of Cooperation

10 0.10095388 2253 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-17-On deck this week: Revisitings

11 0.099704251 487 andrew gelman stats-2010-12-27-Alfred Kahn

12 0.095482908 2255 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-19-How Americans vote

13 0.09196943 284 andrew gelman stats-2010-09-18-Continuing efforts to justify false “death panels” claim

14 0.088207789 1468 andrew gelman stats-2012-08-24-Multilevel modeling and instrumental variables

15 0.084548987 512 andrew gelman stats-2011-01-12-Picking pennies in front of a steamroller: A parable comes to life

16 0.079285681 2245 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-12-More on publishing in journals

17 0.079193905 1634 andrew gelman stats-2012-12-21-Two reviews of Nate Silver’s new book, from Kaiser Fung and Cathy O’Neil

18 0.077150658 2259 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-22-Picking pennies in front of a steamroller: A parable comes to life

19 0.075227834 836 andrew gelman stats-2011-08-03-Another plagiarism mystery

20 0.074907698 1420 andrew gelman stats-2012-07-18-The treatment, the intermediate outcome, and the ultimate outcome: Leverage and the financial crisis


similar blogs computed by lsi model

lsi for this blog:

topicId topicWeight

[(0, 0.167), (1, -0.09), (2, -0.011), (3, 0.058), (4, -0.013), (5, 0.018), (6, 0.079), (7, -0.02), (8, 0.065), (9, -0.003), (10, -0.014), (11, -0.04), (12, 0.014), (13, 0.012), (14, 0.027), (15, -0.021), (16, 0.041), (17, 0.004), (18, 0.052), (19, -0.017), (20, -0.028), (21, 0.018), (22, 0.028), (23, 0.044), (24, -0.036), (25, 0.026), (26, 0.023), (27, 0.012), (28, 0.014), (29, 0.018), (30, -0.076), (31, -0.001), (32, 0.003), (33, -0.038), (34, 0.037), (35, -0.038), (36, 0.006), (37, -0.018), (38, 0.02), (39, -0.003), (40, 0.002), (41, 0.006), (42, -0.029), (43, 0.005), (44, 0.007), (45, -0.032), (46, 0.013), (47, -0.027), (48, -0.024), (49, 0.027)]

similar blogs list:

simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle

same-blog 1 0.97139472 392 andrew gelman stats-2010-11-03-Taleb + 3.5 years

Introduction: I recently had the occasion to reread my review of The Black Swan, from April 2007. It was fun reading my review (and also this pre-review ; “nothing useful escapes from a blackbody,” indeed). It was like a greatest hits of all my pet ideas that I’ve never published. Looking back, I realize that Taleb really was right about a lot of things. Now that the financial crisis has happened, we tend to forget that the experts who Taleb bashes were not always reasonable at all. Here’s what I wrote in my review, three and a half years ago: On page 19, Taleb refers to the usual investment strategy (which I suppose I actually use myself) as “picking pennies in front of a steamroller.” That’s a cute phrase; did he come up with it? I’m also reminded of the famous Martingale betting system. Several years ago in a university library I came across a charming book by Maxim (of gun fame) where he went through chapter after chapter demolishing the Martingale system. (For those who don’t kno

2 0.84397101 2297 andrew gelman stats-2014-04-20-Fooled by randomness

Introduction: From 2006 : Naseem Taleb ‘s publisher sent me a copy of “Fooled by randomness: the hidden role of chance in life and the markets” to review. It’s an important topic, and the book is written in a charming style—I’ll try to respond in kind, with some miscellaneous comments. On the cover of the book is a blurb, “Named by Fortune one of the smartest books of all time.” But Taleb instructs us on page 161-162 to ignore book reviews because of selection bias (the mediocre reviews don’t make it to the book cover). Books vs. articles I prefer writing books to writing journal articles because books are written for the reader (and also, in the case of textbooks, for the teacher), whereas articles are written for referees. Taleb definitely seems to be writing to the reader, not the referee. There is risk in book-writing, since in some ways referees are the ideal audience of experts, but I enjoy the freedom in book-writing of being able to say what I really think. Variation and rando

3 0.80533636 278 andrew gelman stats-2010-09-15-Advice that might make sense for individuals but is negative-sum overall

Introduction: There’s a lot of free advice out there. As I wrote a couple years ago, it’s usually presented as advice to individuals, but it’s also interesting to consider the possible total effects if the advice is taken. For example, Nassim Taleb has a webpage that includes a bunch of one-line bits of advice (scroll to item 132 on the linked page). Here’s his final piece of advice: If you dislike someone, leave him alone or eliminate him; don’t attack him verbally. I’m a big Taleb fan (search this blog to see), but this seems like classic negative-sum advice. I can see how it can be a good individual strategy to keep your mouth shut, bide your time, and then sandbag your enemies. But it can’t be good if lots of people are doing this. Verbal attacks are great, as long as there’s a chance to respond. I’ve been in environments where people follow Taleb’s advice, saying nothing and occasionally trying to “eliminate” people, and it’s not pretty. I much prefer for people to be open

4 0.80370533 203 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-12-John McPhee, the Anti-Malcolm

Introduction: This blog is threatening to turn into Statistical Modeling, Causal Inference, Social Science, and Literature Criticism, but I’m just going to go with the conversational flow, so here’s another post about an essayist. I’m not a big fan of Janet Malcolm’s essays — and I don’t mean I don’t like her attitude or her pro-murderer attitude, I mean I don’t like them all that much as writing. They’re fine, I read them, they don’t bore me, but I certainly don’t think she’s “our” best essayist. But that’s not a debate I want to have right now, and if I did I’m quite sure most of you wouldn’t want to read it anyway. So instead, I’ll just say something about John McPhee. As all right-thinking people agree, in McPhee’s long career he has written two kinds of books: good, short books, and bad, long books. (He has also written many New Yorker essays, and perhaps other essays for other magazines too; most of these are good, although I haven’t seen any really good recent work from him, and so

5 0.7955538 4 andrew gelman stats-2010-04-26-Prolefeed

Introduction: From Anthony Burgess’s review of “The Batsford Companion to Popular Literature,” by Victor Neuberg: Arthur J. Burks (1898-1974) was no gentleman. During the 1930s, when he would sometimes have nearly two million words in current publication, he aimed at producing 18,000 words a day. Editors would call me up and ask me to do a novelette by the next afternoon, and I would, but it nearly killed me. . . . I once appeared on the covers of eleven magazines the same month, and then almost killed myself for years trying to make it twelve. I never did. [Masanao: I think you know where I'm heading with that story.] Ursula Bloom, born 1985 and still with us [this was written sometime between 1978 and 1985], is clearly no lady. Writing also under the pseudonyms of Lozania Prole (there’s an honest name for you), Sheila Burnes and Mary Essex, she has produced 486 boooks, beginning with Tiger at the age of seven. . . . Was Richard Horatio Edgar Wallace (1875-1932) a gentleman? .

6 0.78979695 285 andrew gelman stats-2010-09-18-Fiction is not for tirades? Tell that to Saul Bellow!

7 0.78856242 886 andrew gelman stats-2011-09-02-The new Helen DeWitt novel

8 0.78788668 955 andrew gelman stats-2011-10-12-Why it doesn’t make sense to chew people out for not reading the help page

9 0.78072149 487 andrew gelman stats-2010-12-27-Alfred Kahn

10 0.77957195 2341 andrew gelman stats-2014-05-20-plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose

11 0.77951413 1641 andrew gelman stats-2012-12-27-The Möbius strip, or, marketing that is impervious to criticism

12 0.77469778 365 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-24-Erving Goffman archives

13 0.774445 2189 andrew gelman stats-2014-01-28-History is too important to be left to the history professors

14 0.76737797 1436 andrew gelman stats-2012-07-31-A book on presenting numbers from spreadsheets

15 0.76385134 711 andrew gelman stats-2011-05-14-Steven Rhoads’s book, “The Economist’s View of the World”

16 0.76259655 719 andrew gelman stats-2011-05-19-Everything is Obvious (once you know the answer)

17 0.76254588 11 andrew gelman stats-2010-04-29-Auto-Gladwell, or Can fractals be used to predict human history?

18 0.75829256 2168 andrew gelman stats-2014-01-12-Things that I like that almost nobody else is interested in

19 0.75689006 1190 andrew gelman stats-2012-02-29-Why “Why”?

20 0.7522034 16 andrew gelman stats-2010-05-04-Burgess on Kipling


similar blogs computed by lda model

lda for this blog:

topicId topicWeight

[(9, 0.036), (15, 0.062), (16, 0.073), (24, 0.16), (29, 0.013), (35, 0.11), (40, 0.011), (43, 0.023), (63, 0.02), (82, 0.017), (86, 0.014), (89, 0.015), (90, 0.019), (93, 0.018), (99, 0.25)]

similar blogs list:

simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle

1 0.96620655 2049 andrew gelman stats-2013-10-03-On house arrest for p-hacking

Introduction: People keep pointing me to this excellent news article by David Brown, about a scientist who was convicted of data manipulation: In all, 330 patients were randomly assigned to get either interferon gamma-1b or placebo injections. Disease progression or death occurred in 46 percent of those on the drug and 52 percent of those on placebo. That was not a significant difference, statistically speaking. When only survival was considered, however, the drug looked better: 10 percent of people getting the drug died, compared with 17 percent of those on placebo. However, that difference wasn’t “statistically significant,” either. Specifically, the so-called P value — a mathematical measure of the strength of the evidence that there’s a true difference between a treatment and placebo — was 0.08. . . . Technically, the study was a bust, although the results leaned toward a benefit from interferon gamma-1b. Was there a group of patients in which the results tipped? Harkonen asked the statis

2 0.95412683 1443 andrew gelman stats-2012-08-04-Bayesian Learning via Stochastic Gradient Langevin Dynamics

Introduction: Burak Bayramli writes: In this paper by Sunjin Ahn, Anoop Korattikara, and Max Welling and this paper by Welling and Yee Whye The, there are some arguments on big data and the use of MCMC. Both papers have suggested improvements to speed up MCMC computations. I was wondering what your thoughts were, especially on this paragraph: When a dataset has a billion data-cases (as is not uncommon these days) MCMC algorithms will not even have generated a single (burn-in) sample when a clever learning algorithm based on stochastic gradients may already be making fairly good predictions. In fact, the intriguing results of Bottou and Bousquet (2008) seem to indicate that in terms of “number of bits learned per unit of computation”, an algorithm as simple as stochastic gradient descent is almost optimally efficient. We therefore argue that for Bayesian methods to remain useful in an age when the datasets grow at an exponential rate, they need to embrace the ideas of the stochastic optimiz

same-blog 3 0.94967008 392 andrew gelman stats-2010-11-03-Taleb + 3.5 years

Introduction: I recently had the occasion to reread my review of The Black Swan, from April 2007. It was fun reading my review (and also this pre-review ; “nothing useful escapes from a blackbody,” indeed). It was like a greatest hits of all my pet ideas that I’ve never published. Looking back, I realize that Taleb really was right about a lot of things. Now that the financial crisis has happened, we tend to forget that the experts who Taleb bashes were not always reasonable at all. Here’s what I wrote in my review, three and a half years ago: On page 19, Taleb refers to the usual investment strategy (which I suppose I actually use myself) as “picking pennies in front of a steamroller.” That’s a cute phrase; did he come up with it? I’m also reminded of the famous Martingale betting system. Several years ago in a university library I came across a charming book by Maxim (of gun fame) where he went through chapter after chapter demolishing the Martingale system. (For those who don’t kno

4 0.94942069 1926 andrew gelman stats-2013-07-05-More plain old everyday Bayesianism

Introduction: Following up on this story , Bob Goodman writes: A most recent issue of the New England Journal of Medicine published a study entitled “Biventricular Pacing for Atrioventricular Block and Systolic Dysfunction,” (N Engl J Med 2013; 368:1585-1593), whereby “A hierarchical Bayesian proportional-hazards model was used for analysis of the primary outcome.” It is the first study I can recall in this journal that has reported on Table 2 (primary outcomes) “The Posterior Probability of Hazard Ratio < 1" (which in this case was .9978). This is ok, but to be really picky I will say that there’s typically not so much reason to care about the posterior probability that the effect is greater than 1; I’d rather have an estimate of the effect. Also we should be using informative priors.

5 0.94907475 942 andrew gelman stats-2011-10-04-45% hitting, 25% fielding, 25% pitching, and 100% not telling us how they did it

Introduction: A University of Delaware press release reports : This month, the Journal of Quantitative Analysis in Sports will feature the article “An Estimate of How Hitting, Pitching, Fielding, and Base-stealing Impact Team Winning Percentages in Baseball.” In it, University of Delaware Prof. Charles Pavitt of the Department of Communication defines the perfect “formula” for Major League Baseball (MLB) teams to use to build the ultimate winning team. Pavitt found hitting accounts for more than 45 percent of teams’ winning records, fielding for 25 percent and pitching for 25 percent. And that the impact of stolen bases is greatly overestimated. He crunched hitting, pitching, fielding and base-stealing records for every MLB team over a 48-year period from 1951-1998 with a method no other researcher has used in this area. In statistical parlance, he used a conceptual decomposition of offense and defense into its component parts and then analyzed recombinations of the parts in intuitively mea

6 0.9390626 388 andrew gelman stats-2010-11-01-The placebo effect in pharma

7 0.93675596 1516 andrew gelman stats-2012-09-30-Computational problems with glm etc.

8 0.93284756 837 andrew gelman stats-2011-08-04-Is it rational to vote?

9 0.93262011 591 andrew gelman stats-2011-02-25-Quantitative Methods in the Social Sciences M.A.: Innovative, interdisciplinary social science research program for a data-rich world

10 0.92314965 481 andrew gelman stats-2010-12-22-The Jumpstart financial literacy survey and the different purposes of tests

11 0.92161655 2353 andrew gelman stats-2014-05-30-I posted this as a comment on a sociology blog

12 0.91939831 1390 andrew gelman stats-2012-06-23-Traditionalist claims that modern art could just as well be replaced by a “paint-throwing chimp”

13 0.91862363 807 andrew gelman stats-2011-07-17-Macro causality

14 0.91841495 2244 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-11-What if I were to stop publishing in journals?

15 0.91798937 902 andrew gelman stats-2011-09-12-The importance of style in academic writing

16 0.91495299 511 andrew gelman stats-2011-01-11-One more time on that ESP study: The problem of overestimates and the shrinkage solution

17 0.91483814 1713 andrew gelman stats-2013-02-08-P-values and statistical practice

18 0.91435003 473 andrew gelman stats-2010-12-17-Why a bonobo won’t play poker with you

19 0.91421556 576 andrew gelman stats-2011-02-15-With a bit of precognition, you’d have known I was going to post again on this topic, and with a lot of precognition, you’d have known I was going to post today

20 0.91370809 247 andrew gelman stats-2010-09-01-How does Bayes do it?