11–20 of 70 posts
I've read my share of socio-economic philosophizing, but did anyone else find this a slog to read through?
This guy's writing style is insufferable. Basically, 'let me introduce an abstract, technical concept, criticize the reader for not knowing it, and then not define it until halfway through the article' Dropping words like 'Markov Chain' in a Medium post without any context or explanation just makes the author seem like he wants us to think he's smart.
This guy's writing style is insufferable. Basically, 'let me introduce an abstract, technical concept, criticize the reader for not knowing it, and then not define it until halfway through the article' Dropping words like 'Markov Chain' in a Medium post without any context or explanation just makes the author seem like he wants us to think he's smart.
After that, Taleb's writing is like fresh air: straight and to the point, logical and precise. He's using concepts that I myself utilize in analysis of outside world, shows great intellectual honesty and backs his claims with a plethora of sources. If anything, I expected HN to be full of fans of this writing style, not New Yorker's.
This guy's writing style is insufferable. Basically, 'let me introduce an abstract, technical concept, criticize the reader for not knowing it, and then not define it until halfway through the article' Dropping words like 'Markov Chain' in a Medium post without any context or explanation just makes the author seem like he wants us to think he's smart.
I've read my share of socio-economic philosophizing, but did anyone else find this a slog to read through?
Taleb's style is generally... insufferable, but it's a good way to remind yourself that how nice someone's writing is isn't necessarily a sign of how good their ideas here. He takes great joy, for better or for worse, in pointing out critics who call him arrogant and pretentious rather than criticize his ideas.
I don't have anything to add to the blog post itself, but I find the complaints about the writing style pretty strange, especially to HN. I never even try to read New Yorker articles anymore, which get shared and upvoted here so abundantly: lazy, wordy writing that concentrates on people instead of concepts, tries to reason about important things through emotions instead of logic and in general tries to be prose inst…
People are more likely to comment about things that piss them off though, right?
It is shocking that people continue to cite Piketty. His results have been more or less shot down completely - his measurements are unstable (taken), and insofar as he has shown r > g, this is primarily due to middle class household wealth (rognlie). Further, his results are only within country and don't apply globally (c.f. Milanovic). But his results are just so convenient and sound so cool. How can we discard them…
If I'm wrong, mind citing the correct sources?
It is shocking that people continue to cite Piketty. His results have been more or less shot down completely - his measurements are unstable (taken), and insofar as he has shown r > g, this is primarily due to middle class household wealth (rognlie). Further, his results are only within country and don't apply globally (c.f. Milanovic). But his results are just so convenient and sound so cool. How can we discard them…
It is shocking that people continue to cite Piketty. His results have been more or less shot down completely - his measurements are unstable (taken), and insofar as he has shown r > g, this is primarily due to middle class household wealth (rognlie). Further, his results are only within country and don't apply globally (c.f. Milanovic). But his results are just so convenient and sound so cool. How can we discard them…
[1]: https://www.amazon.com/Capital-Twenty-First-Century-Thomas-P...
[2]: http://piketty.pse.ens.fr/files/capital21c/en/Piketty2014Fig...