Black Swan Farming

The hidden premise of that statement, appears to imply there exists a universal intuition to which this is "counter". I'm not sure that is completely accurate, and is perhaps more useful to think about it in terms of a bifurcated process that can roughly segment the populace into two modes of preferred intuitive operation, but possibly more.

Without going into detail, both types of intuition make subconscious predictions, yet do so in markedly contrasting approaches, which may explain the root cause of arguments between a priori/a posteriori, bayesian/frequentist debates. The underlying ideologies may not necessarily be the effect of environmental upbringing as often assumed, but could instead be structurally rooted in the fundamental wiring and decision making of our cognition.

I'm sure some will disagree, but I naturally find frequentist methods rather challenging to understand, and typically intuit in a distinctly bayesian manner (which is probably less common, typically VC's tend to be good pattern matchers and skilled numeracy - aka natural frequentists). Coincidentally what PG thinks is counter-intuitive (like in this article), could seem rather intuitive to some. Likewise there are almost certainly other insights that are mundane, boring obvious and intuitive to PG, yet are highly counter-intuitive (and interesting) to others.

Of course it's all just anecdote and opinion for now and probably a controversial position, but hoping advancements in cognitive neuroscience research, would one day be able to test this empirically.

And what you are saying is total nonsense.

For the venture capital asset class, average returns over the past 10 years have been poor, including on Sand Hill Road. For the returns, there are many good sources; one of these I mentioned here is an old post of Mark Suster.

Some of Suster's data shows that in the last ten years roughly half of venture partners are no longer.

Common statements are that limited partners are disappointed in the returns and that many are stopping investing in venture funds.

A few venture funds have done well and have been able to raise funds recently. The total number of venture funds able to raise a round easily now may be under 20.

For information technology venture returns, "sucks" is a fully appropriate word. But if you are a venture partner, then you and your LPs know these facts of life very well already. Also there is enough data so that most entrepreneurs know the truth, also.

The DoD evidence is rock solid and right on target: If you suppress your anger and actually read and pay attention, as I have now explained in this thread in overwhelming clarity at the level of about the fourth grade over and over and over, my point is that the DoD shows that research can yield powerful solutions to practical problems. Apparently this very simple, rock solid, overwhelmingly well supported point is just too difficult for you to understand.

To hell with this HN user ID. Mods: Vote it down to zero. Your site and your mod work SUCK. To hell with you. Use your HELL BAN tricks, etc.

Your down voting mods are chicken sh!ts who won't engage in rational discussion but just sit back, silently, and attack carefully written, helpful posts with down voting. HN is arrogant and just SUCKS.

Hell, just go ahead and delete the UID.

Users be warned: HN is run by nasty people.

http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html