nhaliday + tetlock   81

Living with Ignorance in a World of Experts
Another kind of track record that we might care about is not about the expert’s performance, qua expert, but about her record of epistemic integrity. This will be important for helping provide reasonably well supported answers to (Q3) and (Q4) in particular. Anderson (2011) offers some related ideas in her discussion of “criteria for judging honesty” and “criteria for judging epistemic responsibility.” Things we might be interested include the following:
• evidence of previous expert-related dishonesty (e.g. plagiarism, faking data)
• evidence of a record of misleading statements (e.g. cherry-picking data, quotations out of context)
• evidence of a record of misrepresenting views of expert opponents
• evidence of evasion of peer-review or refusal to allow other experts to assess work
• evidence of refusal to disclose data, methodology, or detailed results
• evidence of refusal to disclose results contrary to the expert’s own views
• evidence of “dialogic irrationality”: repeating claims after they have been publicly refuted, without responding to the refutations
• evidence of a record of “over-claiming” of expertise: claiming expertise beyond the expert’s domain of expertise
• evidence of a record of “lending” one’s expertise to support other individuals or institutions that themselves lack epistemic integrity in some of the above ways
• evidence of being an “opinion for hire”—offering expert testimony for pay, perhaps particularly if that testimony conflicts with other things the expert has said
pdf  essay  study  philosophy  rationality  epistemic  info-dynamics  westminster  track-record  checklists  list  tetlock  expert  info-foraging  sleuthin  metabuch  meta:rhetoric  integrity  honor  crooked  phalanges  truth  expert-experience  reason  decision-making 
september 2017 by nhaliday
Gauging the Uncertainty of the Economic Outlook Using Historical Forecasting Errors: The Federal Reserve’s Approach
First, if past performance is a reasonable guide to future accuracy, considerable uncertainty surrounds all macroeconomic projections, including those of FOMC participants. Second, different forecasters have similar accuracy. Third, estimates of uncertainty about future real activity and interest rates are now considerably greater than prior to the financial crisis; in contrast, estimates of inflation accuracy have changed little.
pdf  study  economics  macro  meta:prediction  tetlock  accuracy  org:gov  government  wonkish  moments  🎩  volo-avolo 
september 2017 by nhaliday
How accurate are population forecasts?
2 The Accuracy of Past Projections: https://www.nap.edu/read/9828/chapter/4
good ebook:
Beyond Six Billion: Forecasting the World's Population (2000)
https://www.nap.edu/read/9828/chapter/2
Appendix A: Computer Software Packages for Projecting Population
https://www.nap.edu/read/9828/chapter/12
PDE Population Projections looks most relevant for my interests but it's also *ancient*
https://applieddemogtoolbox.github.io/Toolbox/
This Applied Demography Toolbox is a collection of applied demography computer programs, scripts, spreadsheets, databases and texts.

How Accurate Are the United Nations World Population Projections?: http://pages.stern.nyu.edu/~dbackus/BCH/demography/Keilman_JDR_98.pdf

cf. Razib on this: https://pinboard.in/u:nhaliday/b:d63e6df859e8
news  org:lite  prediction  meta:prediction  tetlock  demographics  population  demographic-transition  fertility  islam  world  developing-world  africa  europe  multi  track-record  accuracy  org:ngo  pdf  study  sociology  measurement  volo-avolo  methodology  estimate  data-science  error  wire-guided  priors-posteriors  books  guide  howto  software  tools  recommendations  libraries  gnxp  scitariat 
july 2017 by nhaliday
Has war been declining? | OUPblog
People have always alternated between the three behavioural options of cooperation, peaceful competition, and violence to attain evolution-shaped human desires. Developments since the onset of the industrial age from 1815 onwards have radically shifted the calculus of war and peace towards the two peaceful options, sharply decreasing belligerency in the parts of the world affected by the process of modernization. Rather than war becoming more costly in terms of life and resources, as many believe to be the case (not so), the real change is that peace has become more rewarding. The Modernization Peace concept scrutinizes, contextualizes, and encompasses within a comprehensive framework the various peace theories advanced over the past few decades, and shows the more valid ones to be elements of a greater whole. By now, war has disappeared within the world’s most developed areas and survives only in its less developed, developing, and undeveloped parts.

Finally, the Modernization Peace concept has been disrupted in the past, most conspicuously during the two world wars, and challenges to it still arise. Challenges include claimants to alternative modernity—such as China and Russia, still much behind in levels of development and affluence—anti-modernists, and failed modernizers that may spawn terrorism, potentially unconventional. While the world has become more peaceful than ever before, with war unprecedentedly disappearing in its most developed parts, there is still much to worry about in terms of security and there is no place for complacency.
essay  article  expert  war  meta:war  peace-violence  martial  cooperate-defect  china  asia  russia  modernity  pinker  trends  the-bones  zeitgeist  broad-econ  org:edu  anthropology  tetlock  incentives  cost-benefit  roots  expert-experience 
june 2017 by nhaliday
On Pinkglossianism | Wandering Near Sawtry
Steven Pinker is not wrong to say that some things have got better – or even that some things are getting better. We live longer. We have more food. We have more medicine. We have more free time. We have less chance of dying at another’s hands. My main objection to his arguments is not that some things have got worse as well (family life, for example, or social trust). It is not that he emphasises proportion when scale is more significant (such as with animal suffering). It is the fragility of these peaceful, prosperous conditions.

Antibiotics have made us healthier but antibiotic resistance threatens to plunge us into epidemics. Globalisation has made us richer but is also a powder-keg of cultural unease. Industrialisation has brought material wealth but it is also damaging the environment. Nuclear weapons have averted international conflict but it would only take one error for them to wreak havoc.

At his best, Pinker reminds us of how much we have to treasure, then. At his worst, he is like a co-passenger in a car – pointing out the sunny weather and the beautiful surroundings as it hurtles towards the edge of a cliff.

http://takimag.com/article/dusting_off_the_crystal_ball_john_derbyshire/print
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2011/11/the-new-york-times-on-violence-and-pinker/
albion  rhetoric  contrarianism  critique  pinker  peace-violence  domestication  crime  criminology  trends  whiggish-hegelian  optimism  pessimism  cynicism-idealism  multi  news  org:lite  gnon  isteveish  futurism  list  top-n  eric-kaufmann  dysgenics  nihil  nationalism-globalism  nuclear  robust  scale  risk  gnxp  scitariat  faq  modernity  tetlock  the-bones  paleocon  journos-pundits  org:sci 
june 2017 by nhaliday
Logic | West Hunter
All the time I hear some public figure saying that if we ban or allow X, then logically we have to ban or allow Y, even though there are obvious practical reasons for X and obvious practical reasons against Y.

No, we don’t.

http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/005864.html
http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/002053.html

compare: https://pinboard.in/u:nhaliday/b:190b299cf04a

Small Change Good, Big Change Bad?: https://www.overcomingbias.com/2018/02/small-change-good-big-change-bad.html
And on reflection it occurs to me that this is actually THE standard debate about change: some see small changes and either like them or aren’t bothered enough to advocate what it would take to reverse them, while others imagine such trends continuing long enough to result in very large and disturbing changes, and then suggest stronger responses.

For example, on increased immigration some point to the many concrete benefits immigrants now provide. Others imagine that large cumulative immigration eventually results in big changes in culture and political equilibria. On fertility, some wonder if civilization can survive in the long run with declining population, while others point out that population should rise for many decades, and few endorse the policies needed to greatly increase fertility. On genetic modification of humans, some ask why not let doctors correct obvious defects, while others imagine parents eventually editing kid genes mainly to max kid career potential. On oil some say that we should start preparing for the fact that we will eventually run out, while others say that we keep finding new reserves to replace the ones we use.

...

If we consider any parameter, such as typical degree of mind wandering, we are unlikely to see the current value as exactly optimal. So if we give people the benefit of the doubt to make local changes in their interest, we may accept that this may result in a recent net total change we don’t like. We may figure this is the price we pay to get other things we value more, and we we know that it can be very expensive to limit choices severely.

But even though we don’t see the current value as optimal, we also usually see the optimal value as not terribly far from the current value. So if we can imagine current changes as part of a long term trend that eventually produces very large changes, we can become more alarmed and willing to restrict current changes. The key question is: when is that a reasonable response?

First, big concerns about big long term changes only make sense if one actually cares a lot about the long run. Given the usual high rates of return on investment, it is cheap to buy influence on the long term, compared to influence on the short term. Yet few actually devote much of their income to long term investments. This raises doubts about the sincerity of expressed long term concerns.

Second, in our simplest models of the world good local choices also produce good long term choices. So if we presume good local choices, bad long term outcomes require non-simple elements, such as coordination, commitment, or myopia problems. Of course many such problems do exist. Even so, someone who claims to see a long term problem should be expected to identify specifically which such complexities they see at play. It shouldn’t be sufficient to just point to the possibility of such problems.

...

Fourth, many more processes and factors limit big changes, compared to small changes. For example, in software small changes are often trivial, while larger changes are nearly impossible, at least without starting again from scratch. Similarly, modest changes in mind wandering can be accomplished with minor attitude and habit changes, while extreme changes may require big brain restructuring, which is much harder because brains are complex and opaque. Recent changes in market structure may reduce the number of firms in each industry, but that doesn’t make it remotely plausible that one firm will eventually take over the entire economy. Projections of small changes into large changes need to consider the possibility of many such factors limiting large changes.

Fifth, while it can be reasonably safe to identify short term changes empirically, the longer term a forecast the more one needs to rely on theory, and the more different areas of expertise one must consider when constructing a relevant model of the situation. Beware a mere empirical projection into the long run, or a theory-based projection that relies on theories in only one area.

We should very much be open to the possibility of big bad long term changes, even in areas where we are okay with short term changes, or at least reluctant to sufficiently resist them. But we should also try to hold those who argue for the existence of such problems to relatively high standards. Their analysis should be about future times that we actually care about, and can at least roughly foresee. It should be based on our best theories of relevant subjects, and it should consider the possibility of factors that limit larger changes.

And instead of suggesting big ways to counter short term changes that might lead to long term problems, it is often better to identify markers to warn of larger problems. Then instead of acting in big ways now, we can make sure to track these warning markers, and ready ourselves to act more strongly if they appear.

Growth Is Change. So Is Death.: https://www.overcomingbias.com/2018/03/growth-is-change-so-is-death.html
I see the same pattern when people consider long term futures. People can be quite philosophical about the extinction of humanity, as long as this is due to natural causes. Every species dies; why should humans be different? And few get bothered by humans making modest small-scale short-term modifications to their own lives or environment. We are mostly okay with people using umbrellas when it rains, moving to new towns to take new jobs, etc., digging a flood ditch after our yard floods, and so on. And the net social effect of many small changes is technological progress, economic growth, new fashions, and new social attitudes, all of which we tend to endorse in the short run.

Even regarding big human-caused changes, most don’t worry if changes happen far enough in the future. Few actually care much about the future past the lives of people they’ll meet in their own life. But for changes that happen within someone’s time horizon of caring, the bigger that changes get, and the longer they are expected to last, the more that people worry. And when we get to huge changes, such as taking apart the sun, a population of trillions, lifetimes of millennia, massive genetic modification of humans, robots replacing people, a complete loss of privacy, or revolutions in social attitudes, few are blasé, and most are quite wary.

This differing attitude regarding small local changes versus large global changes makes sense for parameters that tend to revert back to a mean. Extreme values then do justify extra caution, while changes within the usual range don’t merit much notice, and can be safely left to local choice. But many parameters of our world do not mostly revert back to a mean. They drift long distances over long times, in hard to predict ways that can be reasonably modeled as a basic trend plus a random walk.

This different attitude can also make sense for parameters that have two or more very different causes of change, one which creates frequent small changes, and another which creates rare huge changes. (Or perhaps a continuum between such extremes.) If larger sudden changes tend to cause more problems, it can make sense to be more wary of them. However, for most parameters most change results from many small changes, and even then many are quite wary of this accumulating into big change.

For people with a sharp time horizon of caring, they should be more wary of long-drifting parameters the larger the changes that would happen within their horizon time. This perspective predicts that the people who are most wary of big future changes are those with the longest time horizons, and who more expect lumpier change processes. This prediction doesn’t seem to fit well with my experience, however.

Those who most worry about big long term changes usually seem okay with small short term changes. Even when they accept that most change is small and that it accumulates into big change. This seems incoherent to me. It seems like many other near versus far incoherences, like expecting things to be simpler when you are far away from them, and more complex when you are closer. You should either become more wary of short term changes, knowing that this is how big longer term change happens, or you should be more okay with big long term change, seeing that as the legitimate result of the small short term changes you accept.

https://www.overcomingbias.com/2018/03/growth-is-change-so-is-death.html#comment-3794966996
The point here is the gradual shifts of in-group beliefs are both natural and no big deal. Humans are built to readily do this, and forget they do this. But ultimately it is not a worry or concern.

But radical shifts that are big, whether near or far, portend strife and conflict. Either between groups or within them. If the shift is big enough, our intuition tells us our in-group will be in a fight. Alarms go off.
west-hunter  scitariat  discussion  rant  thinking  rationality  metabuch  critique  systematic-ad-hoc  analytical-holistic  metameta  ideology  philosophy  info-dynamics  aphorism  darwinian  prudence  pragmatic  insight  tradition  s:*  2016  multi  gnon  right-wing  formal-values  values  slippery-slope  axioms  alt-inst  heuristic  anglosphere  optimate  flux-stasis  flexibility  paleocon  polisci  universalism-particularism  ratty  hanson  list  examples  migration  fertility  intervention  demographics  population  biotech  enhancement  energy-resources  biophysical-econ  nature  military  inequality  age-generation  time  ideas  debate  meta:rhetoric  local-global  long-short-run  gnosis-logos  gavisti  stochastic-processes  eden-heaven  politics  equilibrium  hive-mind  genetics  defense  competition  arms  peace-violence  walter-scheidel  speed  marginal  optimization  search  time-preference  patience  futurism  meta:prediction  accuracy  institutions  tetlock  theory-practice  wire-guided  priors-posteriors  distribution  moments  biases  epistemic  nea 
may 2017 by nhaliday
Why China Cannot Rise Peacefully - YouTube
- unexpected accent/tone lol
- principles: states as unit of action/global anarchy, uncertainty (fog-of-war), states as rational, selfish actors
- consequences: need to become as powerful as possible, regional hegemon, prevent peer competitors (no other regional hegemon in world, eg, China)
- future: China as giant Hong Kong
- future coalition: India, Japan, Russia, Vietnam, Singapore, South Korea, and the USA
- does he actually think Brazil coulda gotten as powerful as the US? lol.
- his summary of American grand strategy (lol):
1. Europe (great powers)
2. NE Asia (great powers)
3. Persian Gulf (oil)
- "Europe will become distant 3rd, Europe is a museum, lotta old people." lol
- "not gonna help us with Asia, got their own problems, bankrupting themselves"
- counterarguments: "not gonna grow, China's a Confucian culture (don't pay attention to those), economic interdependence." doesn't buy the last either.
- best counterarguments: nuclear deterrence, economic interdependence, "age of nationalism"
- mass-murder usually strategic (eg, maintaining power) not ideological

debate: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kd-1LymXXX0

interview: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yXSkY4QKDlA
- Clinton's a realist
- plenty of economic independence prior to world wars
- nukes makes WW3 unlikely, but do not rule out limited war (eg, over East/South China Sea)
- Confucian pacifism argument is ahistorical
rhetoric  video  presentation  foreign-policy  realpolitik  usa  china  asia  sinosphere  expansionism  war  great-powers  defense  statesmen  world  prediction  contrarianism  org:edu  org:davos  trends  martial  politics  polisci  nihil  nationalism-globalism  tetlock  kumbaya-kult  meta:war  intel  strategy  history  mostly-modern  russia  communism  cold-war  signal-noise  meta:prediction  🎩  civilization  rationality  realness  thinking  systematic-ad-hoc  uncertainty  outcome-risk  nyc  geopolitics  speaking  order-disorder  GT-101  chart  canada  latin-america  early-modern  world-war  japan  power  india  coalitions  zero-positive-sum  winner-take-all  germanic  europe  mediterranean  zeitgeist  the-bones  developing-world  korea  obama  MENA  pre-2013  energy-resources  economics  top-n  big-picture  trade  stylized-facts  debate  water  business  confucian  nuclear  deterrence  iraq-syria  africa  iran  oceans  climate-change  leviathan  death  cynicism-idealism  multi  interview  clinton  peace-violence  legibility  orient  flux-stasis  conquest-empire  c 
may 2017 by nhaliday
Le Pen and Macron Clash in Vicious Presidential Debate in France - The New York Times
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/04/world/europe/france-debate-marine-le-pen-emmanuel-macron.html
http://www.europe1.fr/politique/dans-lemission-politique-de-france-2-macron-rebondit-sur-la-fusillade-des-champs-elysees-3306584
"This threat will be part of the daily life of the next few years," he said, paying tribute to the victim. "The first mission of the President of the Republic is to protect."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/world/2017/04/19/a-youth-revolt-in-france-boosts-the-far-right/
If Le Pen wins, European leaders fear the disintegration of the E.U. after decades spent trying to bind the continent more closely together. And although she’s down in hypothetical second-round contests, Le Pen enjoys a commanding lead among France’s youngest voters in the 11-candidate first round, polls show. One survey has her winning nearly 40 percent of the vote among those 18 to 24, nearly double the total of her nearest competitor, Emmanuel Macron.
http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2017/04/le-pen-support-young-voters-170415161404170.html
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/13/world/europe/marine-le-pen-national-front-party.html

http://www.economist.com/news/europe/21715979-fran-ois-fillon-admits-no-wrongdoing-putting-his-wife-payroll-his-campaign
François Fillon admits no wrongdoing in putting his wife on the payroll, but his campaign is faltering
http://www.dw.com/en/fillon-election-favorite-despite-plotting-thatcherite-course/a-37131311
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/11/20/nicolas-sarkozy-risks-falling-foul-of-left-wing-tactical-vote-as/

Daily chart: The centre can indeed hold in France’s presidential election: http://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2017/04/daily-chart-5
http://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2017/04/france-s-presidential-election
20% per prediction markets: http://predictwise.com/politics/french-politics

later:
Laurent Wauquiez s'insurge contre «les élites»: http://www.lefigaro.fr/politique/2017/10/25/01002-20171025ARTFIG00363-laurent-wauquiez-s-insurge-contre-les-elites.php
https://twitter.com/epkaufm/status/929011773155442689
New French centre-right contender Laurent Wauquiez follows Kurz model, says elite suppressing debate over mass immigration, Islam, national identity. France for the French
https://twitter.com/whyvert/status/929094212338966528
https://archive.is/xHwZ5
Likely next leader of French Les Republicains @laurentwauquiez positions himself as populist nationalist: denounces the taboo on discussing the nation, massive immigration, identity, values, Islamism
news  org:rec  current-events  europe  gallic  elections  politics  culture-war  westminster  populism  nl-and-so-can-you  nationalism-globalism  multi  government  org:euro  terrorism  crime  order-disorder  patho-altruism  clown-world  lurid  age-generation  data  trends  org:foreign  poll  org:biz  org:anglo  anomie  corruption  business  policy  economics  anglosphere  EU  migrant-crisis  brexit  britain  islam  right-wing  prediction  debate  polisci  tetlock  meta:prediction  judaism  discrimination  leaks  media  eric-kaufmann  twitter  social  commentary  backup  scitariat  gnon 
may 2017 by nhaliday
[1502.05274] How predictable is technological progress?
Recently it has become clear that many technologies follow a generalized version of Moore's law, i.e. costs tend to drop exponentially, at different rates that depend on the technology. Here we formulate Moore's law as a correlated geometric random walk with drift, and apply it to historical data on 53 technologies. We derive a closed form expression approximating the distribution of forecast errors as a function of time. Based on hind-casting experiments we show that this works well, making it possible to collapse the forecast errors for many different technologies at different time horizons onto the same universal distribution. This is valuable because it allows us to make forecasts for any given technology with a clear understanding of the quality of the forecasts. As a practical demonstration we make distributional forecasts at different time horizons for solar photovoltaic modules, and show how our method can be used to estimate the probability that a given technology will outperform another technology at a given point in the future.

model:
- p_t = unit price of tech
- log(p_t) = y_0 - μt + ∑_{i <= t} n_i
- n_t iid noise process
preprint  study  economics  growth-econ  innovation  discovery  technology  frontier  tetlock  meta:prediction  models  time  definite-planning  stylized-facts  regression  econometrics  magnitude  energy-resources  phys-energy  money  cost-benefit  stats  data-science  🔬  ideas  speedometer  multiplicative  methodology  stochastic-processes  time-series  stock-flow  iteration-recursion  org:mat  street-fighting  the-bones 
april 2017 by nhaliday
Why The Best Supreme Court Predictor In The World Is Some Random Guy In Queens | FiveThirtyEight
https://fantasyscotus.lexpredict.com/

Jacob Berlove, 30, of Queens, is the best human Supreme Court predictor in the world. Actually, forget the qualifier. He’s the best Supreme Court predictor in the world. He won FantasySCOTUS three years running. He correctly predicts cases more than 80 percent of the time. He plays under the name “Melech” — “king” in Hebrew.

Berlove has no formal legal training. Nor does he use statistical analyses to aid his predictions. He got interested in the Supreme Court in elementary school, reading his local paper, the Cincinnati Enquirer. In high school, he stumbled upon a constitutional law textbook.

“I read through huge chunks of it and I had a great time,” he told me. “I learned a lot over that weekend.”

Berlove has a prodigious memory for justices’ past decisions and opinions, and relies heavily on their colloquies in oral arguments. When we spoke, he had strong feelings about certain justices’ oratorical styles and how they affected his predictions.

Some justices are easy to predict. “I really appreciate Justice Scalia’s candor,” he said. “In oral arguments, 90 percent of the time he makes it very clear what he is thinking.”

Some are not. “To some extent, Justice Thomas might be the hardest, because he never speaks in oral arguments, ever.”1 That fact is mitigated, though, by Thomas’s rather predictable ideology. Justices Kennedy and Breyer can be tricky, too. Kennedy doesn’t tip his hand too much in oral arguments. And Breyer, Berlove says, plays coy.

“He expresses this deep-seated, what I would argue is a phony humility at oral arguments. ‘No, I really don’t know. This is a difficult question. I have to think about it. It’s very close.’ And then all of sudden he writes the opinion and he makes it seem like it was never a question in the first place. I find that to be very annoying.”

I told Ruger about Berlove. He said it made a certain amount of sense that the best Supreme Court predictor in the world should be some random guy in Queens.

“It’s possible that too much thinking or knowledge about the law could hurt you. If you make your career writing law review articles, like we do, you come up with your own normative baggage and your own preconceptions,” Ruger said. “We can’t be as dispassionate as this guy.”
news  org:data  prediction-markets  meta:prediction  institutions  law  government  trivia  cool  info-foraging  alt-inst  info-dynamics  stories  tools  multi  tetlock  paying-rent  realness  🎩  axioms 
april 2017 by nhaliday
Animal spirits (Keynes) - Wikipedia
Animal spirits is the term John Maynard Keynes used in his 1936 book The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money to describe the instincts, proclivities and emotions that ostensibly influence and guide human behavior, and which can be measured in terms of, for example, consumer confidence. It has since been argued that trust is also included in or produced by "animal spirits".
economics  macro  meta:prediction  tetlock  psychology  social-psych  instinct  heuristic  bounded-cognition  error  info-dynamics  wiki  reference  jargon  aphorism  big-peeps 
april 2017 by nhaliday
The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order - Samuel P. Huntington - Google Books
prediction from 1996:
A civilizational paradigm thus sets forth a relatively simple but not too simple map for understanding what is going on in the world as the twentieth century ends. No paradigm, however, is good forever. The Cold War model of world politics was useful and relevant for forty years but became obsolete in the late l980s, and at some point the civilizational paradigm will suffer a similar fate. For the contemporary period, however, it provides a useful guide for distinguishing what is more important from what is less important. Slightly less than half of the forty-eight ethnic conflicts in the world in early 1993, for example, were between groups from different civilizations. The civilizational perspective would lead the UN. Secretary-General and the U.S. Secretary of State to concentrate their peacemaking efforts on these conflicts which have much greater potential than others to escalate into broader wars.

Paradigms also generate predictions, and a crucial test of a paradigms validity and usefulness is the extent to which the predictions derived from it turn out to be more accurate than those from alternative paradigms. A statist paradigm, for instance, leads John Mearsheimer to predict that “the situation between Ukraine and Russia is ripe for the outbreak of security competition between them. Great powers that share a long and unprotected common border, like that between Russia and Ukraine, often lapse into competition driven by security fears. Russia and Ukraine might overcome this dynamic and learn to live together in harmony, but it would be unusual if they do.”"‘ A civilizational approach, on the other hand, emphasizes the close cultural, personal, and historical links between Russia and Ukraine and the intermingling of Russians and Ukrainians in both countries, and focuses instead on the civilizational fault line that divides Orthodox eastern Ukraine from Uniate western Ukraine, a central historical fact of long standing which, in keeping with the “realist” concept of states as unified and self-identified entities, Mearsheimer totally ignores. While a statist approach highlights the possibility of a Russian-Ukrainian war, a civilizational approach minimizes that and instead highlights the possibility of Ukraine splitting in half, a separation which cultural factors would lead one to predict might be more violent than that of Czechoslovakia but far less bloody than that of Yugoslavia. These different predictions, in turn, give rise to different policy priorities. Mearsheimer's statist prediction of possible war and Russian conquest of Ukraine leads him to support Ukraine's having nuclear weapons. A civilizational approach would encourage cooperation between Russia and Ukraine, urge Ukraine to give up its nuclear weapons, promote substantial economic assistance and other measures to help maintain Ukrainian unity and independence, and sponsor contingency planning for the possible breakup of Ukraine.
gbooks  quotes  big-peeps  huntington  foreign-policy  realpolitik  ideology  thinking  tetlock  history  mostly-modern  prediction  eastern-europe  russia  war  civilization  being-right  realness  aristos  great-powers  statesmen  track-record  walls 
april 2017 by nhaliday
Predicting the timing of peak oil - Wikipedia
As of 2014, it is not widely questioned that oil production will be in decline after 2050[citation needed].
energy-resources  the-world-is-just-atoms  biophysical-econ  prediction  tetlock  data  objektbuch  wiki  reference  environment  deep-materialism  nihil  article  long-short-run 
march 2017 by nhaliday
Discovering Limits to Growth | Do the Math
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Limits_to_Growth
http://www.unz.com/akarlin/review-limits-to-growth-meadows/
https://foundational-research.org/the-future-of-growth-near-zero-growth-rates/
One may of course be skeptical that this general trend will also apply to the growth of our technology and economy at large, as innovation seems to continually postpone our clash with the ceiling, yet it seems inescapable that it must. For in light of what we know about physics, we can conclude that exponential growth of the kinds we see today, in technology in particular and in our economy more generally, must come to an end, and do so relatively soon.
scitariat  prediction  hmm  economics  growth-econ  biophysical-econ  world  energy-resources  the-world-is-just-atoms  books  summary  quotes  commentary  malthus  models  dynamical  🐸  mena4  demographics  environment  org:bleg  nibble  regularizer  science-anxiety  deep-materialism  nihil  the-bones  whiggish-hegelian  multi  tetlock  trends  wiki  macro  pessimism  eh  primitivism  new-religion  cynicism-idealism  gnon  review  recommendations  long-short-run  futurism  ratty  miri-cfar  effective-altruism  hanson  econ-metrics  ems  magnitude  street-fighting  nitty-gritty  physics  data  phys-energy  🔬  multiplicative  iteration-recursion 
march 2017 by nhaliday
DOD FOIA
I think some of these are "good enough for govt work"..., but definitely some interesting stuff, especially about China

nukes:
Litigation Release - Assessing Nuclear Competitions in the 21st Century 2010.pdf

China:
Litigation Release - China Military Strategy 2014.pdf
Litigation Release - China's Perception of Strategic Advantages of First Strike, Preemption, and Preventive Wars 201406.pdf
Litigation Release - China- The Three Warfares 201305.pdf
Litigation Release - How is Chinese Society Affected By Shrinking Family Size 201208.pdf

Americans (and China I think):
Litigation Release - On the Nature of Americans as a Warlike People Workshop Report 200904.pdf

tech:
Litigation Release - Technological Innovation During Protracted War Radar and Atomic Weapons in WWII 201504.pdf
Litigation Release - Technology Transfer Net Assessment Workshop Report 201201.pdf

China again:
Litigation Release - The Future of Africa The Future of China in Africa 2035 201406.pdf

Russia and climate change:
Litigation Release - The Kremlin's Arctic Dreams.pdf

China again:
Litigation Release - The Neurocognitive Divide 201412.pdf

demographic trends mostly:
Litigation Release - The Next 100 Years Workshop Report 200903.pdf
Litigation Release - The Next 100 Years Workshop Report Part II 200908.pdf

more China:
Litigation Release - The Strategic Consequences of Chinese Racism 201301.pdf

Americans:
Litigation Release - Trends in Elite American Attitudes Toward War Workshop Report 201009.pdf

more China:
Litigation Release - Why China Seeks Confrontation with the U.S. 201108.pdf

reflection:
Litigation Release - Why is Strategy so difficult 201102.pdf
org:gov  links  list  military  war  strategy  trends  culture  analysis  prediction  speculation  leaks  gnon  anglosphere  usa  asia  china  foreign-policy  realpolitik  the-great-west-whale  nuclear  russia  environment  technology  climate-change  sinosphere  fertility  martial  big-picture  meta:war  current-events  africa  migration  futurism  migrant-crisis  demographics  tetlock  study  hmm  idk  demographic-transition  multi  pop-diff  chart  defense  zeitgeist  the-bones  great-powers  kumbaya-kult  peace-violence  white-paper 
march 2017 by nhaliday
Information Processing: How Brexit was won, and the unreasonable effectiveness of physicists
‘If you don’t get this elementary, but mildly unnatural, mathematics of elementary probability into your repertoire, then you go through a long life like a one-legged man in an ass-kicking contest. You’re giving a huge advantage to everybody else. One of the advantages of a fellow like Buffett … is that he automatically thinks in terms of decision trees and the elementary math of permutations and combinations… It’s not that hard to learn. What is hard is to get so you use it routinely almost everyday of your life. The Fermat/Pascal system is dramatically consonant with the way that the world works. And it’s fundamental truth. So you simply have to have the technique…

‘One of the things that influenced me greatly was studying physics… If I were running the world, people who are qualified to do physics would not be allowed to elect out of taking it. I think that even people who aren’t [expecting to] go near physics and engineering learn a thinking system in physics that is not learned so well anywhere else… The tradition of always looking for the answer in the most fundamental way available – that is a great tradition.’ --- Charlie Munger, Warren Buffet’s partner.

...

If you want to make big improvements in communication, my advice is – hire physicists, not communications people from normal companies, and never believe what advertising companies tell you about ‘data’ unless you can independently verify it. Physics, mathematics, and computer science are domains in which there are real experts, unlike macro-economic forecasting which satisfies neither of the necessary conditions – 1) enough structure in the information to enable good predictions, 2) conditions for good fast feedback and learning. Physicists and mathematicians regularly invade other fields but other fields do not invade theirs so we can see which fields are hardest for very talented people. It is no surprise that they can successfully invade politics and devise things that rout those who wrongly think they know what they are doing. Vote Leave paid very close attention to real experts. ...

More important than technology is the mindset – the hard discipline of obeying Richard Feynman’s advice: ‘The most important thing is not to fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool.’ They were a hard floor on ‘fooling yourself’ and I empowered them to challenge everybody including me. They saved me from many bad decisions even though they had zero experience in politics and they forced me to change how I made important decisions like what got what money. We either operated scientifically or knew we were not, which is itself very useful knowledge. (One of the things they did was review the entire literature to see what reliable studies have been done on ‘what works’ in politics and what numbers are reliable.) Charlie Munger is one half of the most successful investment partnership in world history. He advises people – hire physicists. It works and the real prize is not the technology but a culture of making decisions in a rational way and systematically avoiding normal ways of fooling yourself as much as possible. This is very far from normal politics.
albion  hsu  scitariat  politics  strategy  tactics  recruiting  stories  reflection  britain  brexit  data-science  physics  interdisciplinary  impact  arbitrage  spock  discipline  clarity  lens  thick-thin  quotes  commentary  tetlock  meta:prediction  wonkish  complex-systems  intricacy  systematic-ad-hoc  realness  current-events  info-dynamics  unaffiliated 
january 2017 by nhaliday
The Experts | West Hunter
It seems to me that not all people called experts actually are. In fact, there are whole fields in which none of the experts are experts. But let’s try to define terms.

...

Along these lines, I’ve read Tetlock’s book, Expert Political Judgment. A funny, funny, book. I will have more to say on that later.

USSR: https://westhunt.wordpress.com/2014/10/20/the-experts/#comment-60760
iraq war:
https://westhunt.wordpress.com/2014/10/20/the-experts/#comment-60653
Of course it is how Bush sold the war. Selling the war involving statements to the press, leaks, etc, not a Congressional resolution, which is the product of that selling job. Leaks to that lying slut at the New York Times, Judith Miller, for example.

Actively seeking a nuclear weapons capacity would have meant making fissionables, or building facilities to make fissionables. That hadn’t happened, and it was impossible for Iraq to have done so, given that any such effort had to be undetectable (because we hadn’t detected it with our ‘national technical means’, spy satellites and such) and given their limited resources in men, money, and materiel. Iraq had done nothing along these lines. Absolutely nothing.

https://westhunt.wordpress.com/2014/10/20/the-experts/#comment-60674
You don’t even know what yellow cake is. It is true that Saddam had had a nuclear program before the Gulf War, although it had not come too close to a weapon – but that program had been destroyed, and could not be rebuilt A. in a way invisible to our spy satellites and B with no money, because of sanctions.

The 550 tons of uranium oxide- unenriched uranium oxide – was a leftover from the earlier program. Under UN seal, and those seals had not been broken. Without enrichment, and without a means of enrichment, it was useless.

What’s the point of pushing this nonsense? somebody paying you?

The President was a moron, the Government of the United States proved itself a pack of fools,as did the New York Times, the Washington Post, Congress, virtually all of the pundits, etc. etc. And undoubtedly you were a fool as well: you might as well deal with it, because the truth is not going to go away.

interesting discussion of battle fatigue and desertion: https://westhunt.wordpress.com/2014/10/20/the-experts/#comment-60709
Actually, I don’t know how Freudian those Army psychologists were in 1944: they may have been useless in some other way. The gist is that in the European theater, for example in the Normandy campaign, the US had a much higher rate of psychological casualties than the Germans. “Both British and American psychiatrists were struck by the ‘apparently few cases of psychoneurosis’ among German prisoners of war. ” They were lower in the Red Army, as well.

In the Pacific theater, combat fatigue was even worse for US soldiers, but rare among the Japanese.

...

The infantry took most of the casualties – it was a very dangerous, unpleasant job. People didn’t like being in the infantry. In the American Army, and to a lesser extent, the British Army, getting into medical evacuation channels was a way to avoid getting killed. Not so much in the German Army: suspected malingerers were shot. In the American Army, they weren’t. That’s the most importance difference between the Germans and Americans affecting the ‘combat fatigue’ rate – the Germans didn’t put up with it. They did have some procedures, but they all ended up putting the guy back in combat fairly rapidly.

Even for desertion, only ONE American soldier was executed. In the Germany Army, 20,000. It makes a difference. We ran a soft war: since we ended up with whole divisions out of the fight, we probably would have done better (won faster, lost fewer guys) if we had been harsher on malingerers and deserters.

more on emdees: https://westhunt.wordpress.com/2014/10/20/the-experts/#comment-60697
As for your idea that doctors improve with age, I doubt it. So do some other people: for example, in this article in Annals of Internal Medicine (Systematic review: the relationship between clinical experience and quality of health care), they say “Overall, 32 of the 62 (52%) evaluations reported decreasing performance with increasing years in practice for all outcomes assessed; 13 (21%) reported decreasing performance with increasing experience for some outcomes but no association for others; 2 (3%) reported that performance initially increased with increasing experience, peaked, and then decreased (concave relationship); 13 (21%) reported no association; 1 (2%) reported increasing performance with increasing years in practice for some outcomes but no association for others; and 1 (2%) reported increasing performance with increasing years in practice for all outcomes. Results did not change substantially when the analysis was restricted to studies that used the most objective outcome measures.

I don’t how well that 25-year old doctor with an IQ of 160 would do, never having met anyone like that. I do know a mathematician who has an IQ around 160 and was married to a doctor, but she* dumped him after he put her through med school and came down with lymphoma.

And that libertarian friend I mentioned, who said that although quarantine would have worked against AIDS, better that we didn’t, despite the extra hundreds of thousands of deaths that resulted – why, he’s a doctor.

*all the other fifth-years in her program also dumped their spouses. Catching?

climate change: https://westhunt.wordpress.com/2014/10/20/the-experts/#comment-60787
I think that predicting climate is difficult, considering the complex feedback loops, but I know that almost every right-wing thing said about it that I have checked out turned out to be false.
west-hunter  rant  discussion  social-science  error  history  psychology  military  war  multi  mostly-modern  bounded-cognition  martial  crooked  meta:war  realness  being-right  emotion  scitariat  info-dynamics  poast  world-war  truth  tetlock  alt-inst  expert-experience  epidemiology  public-health  spreading  disease  sex  sexuality  iraq-syria  gender  gender-diff  parenting  usa  europe  germanic  psychiatry  courage  medicine  meta:medicine  age-generation  aging  climate-change  track-record  russia  communism  economics  correlation  nuclear  arms  randy-ayndy  study  evidence-based  data  time  reason  ability-competence  complex-systems  politics  ideology  roots  government  elite  impetus 
january 2017 by nhaliday
Information Processing: Brexit in the Multiverse: Dominic Cummings on the Vote Leave campaign
some other stuff from same post:
Generally the better educated are more prone to irrational political opinions and political hysteria than the worse educated far from power. Why? In the field of political opinion they are more driven by fashion, a gang mentality, and the desire to pose about moral and political questions all of which exacerbate cognitive biases, encourage groupthink, and reduce accuracy. Those on average incomes are less likely to express political views to send signals; political views are much less important for signalling to one’s immediate in-group when you are on 20k a year. The former tend to see such questions in more general and abstract terms, and are more insulated from immediate worries about money. The latter tend to see such questions in more concrete and specific terms and ask ‘how does this affect me?’. The former live amid the emotional waves that ripple around powerful and tightly linked self-reinforcing networks. These waves rarely permeate the barrier around insiders and touch others.
hsu  scitariat  politics  polisci  government  brexit  britain  people  profile  commentary  counterfactual  albion  meta:prediction  tetlock  wonkish  complex-systems  current-events  info-dynamics  unaffiliated  education  class  epistemic  biases  organizing 
january 2017 by nhaliday
Economists and the Reds | West Hunter
https://westhunt.wordpress.com/2016/07/02/economists-and-the-reds/#comment-81023
Heilbroner once said: “The farther to the right one looks, the more prescient has been the historical foresight; the farther to the left, the less so. ”

You know, someone should blame right-wingers for being correct about some things, since that more or less automatically drove left-wingers into being wrong.

I think that’s less of a problem today.

Well, how long was the political right particularly associated with capitalism…100-150 years? Before and after that, I don’t know if the political right’s track record of prediction looks that good.

Heilbroner was talking about people like Friedman, not Edmund Burke.

Paul Samuelson’s repeated predictions of the Soviet Union economy catching up with the USA: https://utopiayouarestandinginit.com/2015/01/24/paul-samuelsons-repeated-predictions-of-the-soviet-union-economy-catching-up-with-the-usa/

Kissinger detente: http://ic.galegroup.com/ic/whic/ReferenceDetailsPage/DocumentToolsPortletWindow?displayGroupName=Reference&jsid=1a94cad9fcddfd654fdca52eca9cf6c8&action=2&catId=&documentId=GALE%7CCX2876100022&u=catholiccenhs&zid=c159e34f1bdf497a992077a286af2b4b

http://www.nytimes.com/books/00/03/12/specials/sontag-communism.html
In a passage eliminated from The Nation version, Miss Sontag also criticized liberal publications. ''Imagine, if you will, someone who read only the Reader's Digest between 1950 and 1970, and someone in the same period who read only The Nation or The New Statesman. Which reader would have been better informed about the realities of Communism? The answer, I think, should give us pause. Can it be that our enemies were right?''

https://slatestarscratchpad.tumblr.com/post/163893420301/its-pretty-easy-to-look-back-on-the-piles-of
I think I would have been a Communist in 1910.

I’m not sure what you have to add to 1910-me to make me not a Communist. Extra IQ wouldn’t work - there were a lot of Communist geniuses. The best rationality training available at the time wouldn’t work - it tended to produce a progressive atheism that segued easily into Communism. Some sort of Burkean conservativism would’ve been the only hope, but I’m not sure how you could have convinced me of Burkean conservativism.

...

Overall I’m very gloomy at whether rationality alone could have prevented Communism, and I’m gloomy that whatever the next Communism is, we’ll have to go through it before we learn our lesson.

more:
https://pinboard.in/u:nhaliday/b:6261788f644f
https://pinboard.in/u:nhaliday/b:bec2af05da27
https://pinboard.in/u:nhaliday/b:164c54bbd5af
https://pinboard.in/u:nhaliday/b:d6b8462484f8
https://pinboard.in/u:nhaliday/b:3ee8bf371e2e

https://westhunt.wordpress.com/2019/02/24/good-excuse/
I think one could truthfully say that one reason for the failure of Communism in the Soviet Union was that the heart of the country had been torn out. Something similar happened in France, in the 1920s and 1930s. People would talk about some problem that need to be solved, or some desirable innovation, and explain that it never happened, because the guy that should have done it died at Verdun. But it was worse in Russia. And it’s not just the dead: a lot of guys were crippled – so many that they made Moscow look bad, and therefore were exiled to Central Asia for appearances’ sake.

In part, the Soviet Union failed because ” an assegai had been thrust into the belly of the nation”. This makes a half-decent excuse: but it would be a better excuse if the Soviets hadn’t done so much of it to themselves.

...

Back in the 1950s, Russia was a lot weaker than it looked. I wonder how many people understood that. Ike, certainly.
west-hunter  economics  history  cold-war  social-science  epistemic  tetlock  error  meta:prediction  authoritarianism  bounded-cognition  descriptive  capitalism  ideology  mostly-modern  israel  stories  macro  realness  being-right  scitariat  info-dynamics  track-record  communism  questions  truth  multi  news  org:rec  media  ratty  yvain  ssc  tumblr  social  pre-ww2  usa  reflection  westminster  alt-inst  politics  polisci  stylized-facts  metabuch  poast  russia  ability-competence  rationality  reason  expert-experience  chart  explanans  big-peeps  old-anglo  straussian  kissinger  people  statesmen  gender  demographics  population  war  branches  world-war 
january 2017 by nhaliday
Roy Amara - Wikipedia
We tend to overestimate the effect of a technology in the short run and underestimate the effect in the long run.
aphorism  quotes  people  wiki  usa  technology  tetlock  biases  metabuch  long-short-run  time  info-dynamics  flux-stasis 
december 2016 by nhaliday
SSC Journal Club: Expert Prediction Of Experiments | Slate Star Codex
- simple behavioral economics experiment (predicting which incentive would work best for MTurk)
- experts did better, but w/ caveats
1. prestige didn't matter, PhD students did just as well as full professors
2. field didn't matter (w/i a group of related fields)
3. advantage only present by one measure (absolute error rather than relative)
4. advantage was small
5. averaging got rid of it (wisdom of crowds)
6. doing well w/ a little empirical data for related problem predicted doing well on general problem. so expertise doesn't seem to be important as opposed just being good at forecasting?
yvain  ssc  study  summary  economics  behavioral-econ  tetlock  social-science  ratty  rationality  cool  hmm  insight  🤖  meta:prediction  biases  bounded-cognition  incentives  ensembles  realness  info-dynamics  microfoundations 
november 2016 by nhaliday
Mandelbrot (and Hudson’s) The (mis)Behaviour of Markets: A Fractal View of Risk, Ruin, and Reward | EVOLVING ECONOMICS
If you have read Nassim Taleb’s The Black Swan you will have come across some of Benoit Mandelbrot’s ideas. However, Mandelbrot and Hudson’s The (mis)Behaviour of Markets: A Fractal View of Risk, Ruin, and Reward offers a much clearer critique of the underpinnings of modern financial theory (there are many parts of The Black Swan where I’m still not sure I understand what Taleb is saying). Mandelbrot describes and pulls apart the contributions of Markowitz, Sharpe, Black, Scholes and friends in a way likely understandable to the intelligent lay reader. I expect that might flow from science journalist Richard Hudson’s involvement in writing the book.

- interesting parable about lakes and markets (but power laws aren't memoryless...?)
- yeah I think that's completely wrong actually. the important property of power laws is the lack of finite higher-order moments.

based off http://www.iima.ac.in/~jrvarma/blog/index.cgi/2008/12/21/ I think he really did mean a power law (x = 100/sqrt(r) => pdf is p(x) ~ |dr/dx| = 2e4/x^3)

edit: ah I get it now, for X ~ p(x) = 2/x^3 on [1,inf), we have E[X|X > k] = 2k, so not memoryless, but rather subject to a "slippery slope"
books  summary  finance  map-territory  tetlock  review  econotariat  distribution  parable  blowhards  multi  risk  decision-theory  tails  meta:prediction  complex-systems  broad-econ  power-law 
november 2016 by nhaliday
political analysis | West Hunter
Just to make things clear, most political reporters are morons, nearly as bad as sports reporters. Mostly ugly cheerleaders for their side, rather than analysts. Uninteresting.

how to analyze polls:

Who ever is ahead in the polls at the time of election is extremely likely to win. Talk about how Candidate X would have a ‘difficult path to 270 electoral votes’ when he’s up 2 points (for example), is pretty much horseshit. There are second-order considerations: you get more oomph per voter when the voter is in a small state, and you also want your votes distributed fairly evenly, so that you win states giving you a majority of electoral votes by a little rather than winning states giving you a minority of electoral votes by huge margins. Not that a candidate can do much about this, of course.

When you hear someone say that it’s really 50 state contests [ more if you think about Maine and Nebraska] , so you should pay attention to the state polls, not the national polls: also horseshit. In some sense, it is true – but when your national polls go up, so do your state polls – almost all of them, in practice. On election day, or just before, you want to consider national polls rather than state polls, because they are almost always more recent, therefore more accurate.

When should you trust an outlier poll, rather than the average: when you want to be wrong.

Money doesn’t help much. Political consultants will tell you that it does, but then they get 15% of ad buys.

A decent political reporter would actually go out and talk to people that aren’t exactly like him. Apparently this no longer happens.

All of these rules have exceptions – but if you understand those [rare] exceptions and can apply them, you’re paying too much attention to politics.
thinking  politics  media  data  street-fighting  poll  contrarianism  len:short  west-hunter  objektbuch  metameta  checklists  sampling-bias  outliers  descriptive  social-choice  gilens-page  elections  scitariat  money  null-result  polisci  incentives  stylized-facts  metabuch  chart  top-n  hi-order-bits  track-record  wonkish  data-science  tetlock  meta:prediction  info-foraging  civic  info-dynamics  interests 
september 2016 by nhaliday
Tetlock and Gardner’s Superforecasting: The Art and Science of Prediction | EVOLVING ECONOMICS
not as good as Expert Political Judgement apparently

Tetlock’s formula for a successful team is fairly simple. Get lots of forecasts, calculate the average of the forecast, and give extra weight to the top forecasters – a version of wisdom of the crowds. Then extremize the forecast. If the forecast is a 70% probability, bump up to 85%. If 30%, cut it to 15%.

The idea behind extremising is quite clever. No one in the group has access to all the dispersed information. If everyone had all the available information, this would tend to raise their confidence, which would result in a more extreme forecast. Since we can’t give everyone all the information, extremising is an attempt to simulate what would happen if you did. To get the benefits of this extremising, however, requires diversity. If everyone holds the same information there is no sharing of information to be simulated.
tetlock  books  review  summary  econotariat  meta:prediction  complex-systems  ensembles  biases  rationality  bounded-cognition  bias-variance  extrema  diversity  broad-econ  info-dynamics 
september 2016 by nhaliday
Our fictional pundit predicted more correct primary results than Nate Silver did - The Washington Post
Wisconsinites are mostly a simple people. They eat their three lunches, kiss their often enormous children on their often featureless faces, and go to church so they can pray for the 2 Broke Girls.
media  2016-election  lmao  politics  arbitrage  news  tetlock  org:rec  troll  current-events 
may 2016 by nhaliday
« earlier      
per page:    204080120160

bundles : abstractframepeepsprediction

related tags

2016-election  80000-hours  ability-competence  absolute-relative  academia  accretion  accuracy  acemoglu  acm  acmtariat  additive  advice  africa  age-generation  aggregator  aging  ai  albion  alt-inst  altruism  analysis  analytical-holistic  anglo  anglosphere  anomie  anthropology  aphorism  applicability-prereqs  applications  arbitrage  aristos  arms  art  article  asia  audio  authoritarianism  automation  axioms  backup  behavioral-econ  behavioral-gen  being-right  betting  bias-variance  biases  big-peeps  big-picture  bio  biodet  biohacking  biophysical-econ  biotech  blog  blowhards  books  bostrom  bounded-cognition  branches  bret-victor  brexit  britain  broad-econ  business  c:**  c:***  caching  canada  candidate-gene  capitalism  charity  chart  checking  checklists  china  civic  civilization  clarity  class  clever-rats  climate-change  clinton  clown-world  coalitions  cog-psych  cold-war  commentary  communism  community  comparison  competition  complex-systems  composition-decomposition  concept  confluence  confucian  conquest-empire  contest  contradiction  contrarianism  convergence  convexity-curvature  cool  cooperate-defect  coordination  core-rats  correlation  corruption  cost-benefit  counter-revolution  counterfactual  courage  cracker-econ  crime  criminology  critique  crooked  crux  cultural-dynamics  culture  culture-war  current-events  curvature  cycles  cynicism-idealism  darwinian  data  data-science  database  dataviz  death  debate  debt  debugging  decision-making  decision-theory  deep-materialism  defense  definite-planning  demographic-transition  demographics  dennett  descriptive  deterrence  developing-world  discipline  discovery  discrimination  discussion  disease  distribution  diversity  divide-and-conquer  domestication  duality  dynamical  dysgenics  early-modern  eastern-europe  econ-metrics  econometrics  economics  econotariat  eden-heaven  education  effective-altruism  efficiency  eh  elections  elegance  elite  embodied  embodied-cognition  embodied-street-fighting  emotion  empirical  ems  energy-resources  enhancement  ensembles  environment  epidemiology  epistemic  equilibrium  eric-kaufmann  error  essay  estimate  EU  europe  evidence-based  examples  existence  exocortex  expansionism  experiment  expert  expert-experience  explanans  extrema  faq  fashun  fertility  finance  flexibility  flux-stasis  flynn  foreign-policy  formal-values  fourier  frontier  futurism  gallic  garett-jones  gavisti  gbooks  gelman  gender  gender-diff  genetics  genomics  geopolitics  germanic  gilens-page  gnon  gnosis-logos  gnxp  government  gray-econ  great-powers  group-selection  growth  growth-econ  GT-101  guide  GWAS  gwern  haidt  hanson  health  healthcare  heterodox  heuristic  hi-order-bits  hidden-motives  higher-ed  history  hive-mind  hmm  homo-hetero  honor  howto  hsu  human-capital  huntington  hypocrisy  ideas  ideology  idk  illusion  impact  impetus  incentives  india  inequality  info-dynamics  info-foraging  innovation  insight  instinct  institutions  integrity  intel  intelligence  interdisciplinary  interests  intervention  interview  intricacy  intuition  investing  iq  iran  iraq-syria  islam  israel  isteveish  iteration-recursion  japan  jargon  journos-pundits  judaism  judgement  kissinger  knowledge  korea  kumbaya-kult  labor  latin-america  law  leadership  leaks  learning  lectures  left-wing  legacy  legibility  len:short  lens  lesswrong  let-me-see  leviathan  libraries  links  list  lmao  local-global  logic  long-short-run  lurid  machine-learning  macro  magnitude  malthus  management  map-territory  marginal  marginal-rev  markov  martial  math  measurement  media  medicine  mediterranean  MENA  mena4  mental-math  meta:medicine  meta:prediction  meta:rhetoric  meta:war  metabolic  metabuch  metameta  methodology  metrics  michael-nielsen  micro  microfoundations  migrant-crisis  migration  military  minimalism  miri-cfar  models  modernity  moloch  moments  money  mood-affiliation  morality  mostly-modern  multi  multiplicative  murray  nascent-state  nationalism-globalism  nature  near-far  network-structure  neurons  new-religion  news  nibble  nihil  nitty-gritty  nl-and-so-can-you  noahpinion  noise-structure  nootropics  north-weingast-like  notation  nuclear  null-result  nyc  obama  objektbuch  occam  oceans  old-anglo  oly  open-closed  optimate  optimism  optimization  order-disorder  org:anglo  org:biz  org:bleg  org:bv  org:data  org:davos  org:econlib  org:edge  org:edu  org:euro  org:foreign  org:gov  org:lite  org:mag  org:mat  org:nat  org:ngo  org:rec  org:sci  organization  organizing  orient  outcome-risk  outliers  paleocon  parable  parenting  parsimony  path-dependence  patho-altruism  patience  paul-romer  paying-rent  pdf  peace-violence  people  pessimism  phalanges  philosophy  phys-energy  physics  pinker  piracy  planning  poast  podcast  policy  polisci  political-econ  politics  poll  pop-diff  population  populism  power  power-law  pragmatic  pre-2013  pre-ww2  prediction  prediction-markets  preference-falsification  preprint  presentation  primitivism  priors-posteriors  privacy  problem-solving  profile  propaganda  prudence  psychiatry  psychology  psychometrics  public-health  puzzles  quantified-self  questions  quiz  quotes  randy-ayndy  rant  rat-pack  rationality  ratty  realness  realpolitik  reason  recommendations  recruiting  reddit  reference  reflection  regression  regularizer  reinforcement  review  rhetoric  right-wing  rigor  rindermann-thompson  risk  robust  roots  rot  russia  s:*  s:**  sampling-bias  sanctity-degradation  scale  science  science-anxiety  scitariat  search  self-interest  sex  sexuality  signal-noise  signaling  singularity  sinosphere  skeleton  skunkworks  sleuthin  slippery-slope  social  social-choice  social-norms  social-psych  social-science  society  sociology  software  space  speaking  speculation  speed  speedometer  spock  spreading  ssc  stagnation  stanford  statesmen  stats  status  stochastic-processes  stock-flow  stories  strategy  straussian  stream  street-fighting  structure  students  study  stylized-facts  subculture  summary  supply-demand  survey  systematic-ad-hoc  tactics  tails  taxes  tcstariat  technocracy  technology  techtariat  terrorism  tetlock  the-bones  the-great-west-whale  the-self  the-world-is-just-atoms  theory-of-mind  theory-practice  thick-thin  thinking  threat-modeling  thucydides  time  time-preference  time-series  tools  top-n  track-record  tracker  trade  tradeoffs  tradition  trends  tribalism  tricki  trivia  troll  trump  truth  tumblr  twitter  unaffiliated  uncertainty  unit  universalism-particularism  us-them  usa  vaclav-smil  values  vampire-squid  video  virtu  visual-understanding  volo-avolo  walls  walter-scheidel  war  water  west-hunter  westminster  whiggish-hegelian  white-paper  wiki  winner-take-all  wire-guided  within-without  wonkish  world  world-war  worrydream  X-not-about-Y  yvain  zeitgeist  zero-positive-sum  zooming  🌞  🎩  🐸  🔬  🤖 

Copy this bookmark:



description:


tags: