Because now there are no gatekeepers. But for investors, the same applies. I know what I appreciated about your book is that once I started forcing myself to put my skin in the game about what I was writing, I think it made me a better investor, too. No one loses their job because everyone is doing the same thing. With insufficient data you miss on a good mean. Traders say the direction of the market doesn't matter much.
Its confidence increased as the number of friendly feedings grew, and it felt increasingly safe even though the slaughter was more and more imminent. I read about once in London when you gave an hour-long lecture and for one minute you talked about your own viewpoint on the Precautionary Principle -- and it got completely twisted. As if the whole talk was about climate-denying. And psychology -- you know -- is disastrously unrigorous, both empirically and mathematically, particularly when you have probability in it. Now, surprisingly, the book was not reviewed in the United States. For example, in the United States, over how they draw up their estimates over how the scenarios the banks are asked to run are way too pessimistic. When we looked at war we realized that the observed mean is one-third of the real mean.
You get, eventually, food -- but you don't have the chance to overeat too much. It is irresponsible and foolish to put our trust in the ability of such experts to get us out of this mess. So the distinction between hobby and work is blurred for an artisan. It makes me feel like I'm not dead, just bullshitting like I'm bullshitting in the meeting. So you're losing to inflation as well. Or bed bugs -- they use humans by being in the bed to spread and get to other humans.
In phase 2, I went against economic people who use the bell curve. In most sciences you can -- in hard sciences, I mean. In other words, if work is not intense, just don't do work. In other words it creates devastating. Essays recommended by Taleb I select essayists as they are more consistent in their prose —you read their prose not their books. For the following reason: Think of Google. This list does not include authors you read for their philosophy.
But what's worse is not the fact that they're rebels -- who cares if Syrian rebels were in New York? The first would be short-sellers. Can you assess the danger a criminal poses by examining only what he does on an ordinary day? Let me explain the foundation of the problem: All of these analysts who look at you and the stock market assume that if you invest in the stock market, you'll replicate the performance of the stock market. So as an investor you need to think about it in these terms: no investor knows what's going to happen to him or her in the future. I will tell my experience from reading one of the books from the list bellow — Ferdydurke by Witold Gombrowicz. So let me explain to you how, as a financial writer, you can have skin in the game. Would you throw Elon Musk in that group as well? And I knew that from markets. And it's not comparative: In trading, if you go bust, you go bust.
That isn't unhealthy, but it's one discovery I've made which is very unfortunate. So that's how you can gain weight although you're fasting. The principle of skin in the game says that there's nothing I say about public matters that cannot be recorded. Today, you are vulnerable to reputational violence. We're talking about the same politician from Georgia, no? Stoffel: Well, I don't want to take up too much more of your time, I have one last question. That's the first statement I would make.
It's your techniques that matter. For the antifragile, harm from errors should be less than the benefits. When I'm not there, I don't work. Is it the stressor of putting muscles on you or is it simply having muscles? And if it looked like something that was worth investing in, I'd write an article about it. What happened in London is someone managed to get a copy of the book.
How much upside do you have? Some people whisper and you hear what they say. By taking risks by going against power -- publicly. ? So, it's simple, putting some risk makes me feel alive. But what we have is the exact opposite. Another one is thermal variation. The particular environments where we are made to fast are environments where food is rare.
I don't know if you know what's happening in Syria now, for example. Simply, people need to be blinded by knowledge - we are made to follow leaders who can gather people together because the advantages of being in groups trump the disadvantages of being alone. But -- assuming that people care about my position -- it's a big, famous short. Because -- typically -- you pick your points -- maybe you're only short for 30% of the year, not the whole year -- so you're dynamically hedged. So you have that discrepancy. If I have a short, I connect.
And I know something much more serious without taking these experiments -- from the real world. What I've been doing is saying: If you have an investment -- as an institutional investor, forget the individual investor -- and you don't have a tail-hedge protection, then your returns are virtually going to be zero -- over the long run. And if you test the reverse, it gets worse. So think about it: It's like a newspaper by itself. He might say that he specializes in the ideas that count the most.