Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Experts from a world that no longer exists

collaborativefund.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 267 posts

Re: Experts from a world that no longer exists

#91

Post by msla »

sidlls wrote: post #64
notreallyserio wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't help but wonder how much better our governments would operate if the median age of their workers were somewhat lower (IIRC that's around 45).

That's more than a little ageist. Age has little to do with it. I've worked for--and been managed by--thick-headed, egotistical 20-somethings and stodgy older folks alike. Youth who think they're forging new territory usually aren't, but there are plenty who think they are and have an arrogance about it that is insufferable.

> Youth who think they're forging new territory usually aren't

But that's part of the point of the article: The territory actively changes, so even if it's the same location in some sense, it's still new territory, ripe for exploration. Old people can see that, but it requires looking with fresh eyes, as opposed to only being willing to see what was there decades ago.

Re: Experts from a world that no longer exists

#94

Post by antod »

paulpauper wrote: post #75

Whether it's finance, geo politics, economics or even Covid, I have found that experts tend to have terrible track records. The same people today who are predicting Bitcoin will go to 250k in four years, made that very prediction four years ago. These people are being paid large sums of money to produce worse insights and worse performance that even random bloggers or random posters on r/wallstreetbets. It's hard to…

To me that kind of observation seems subject to all kinds of biases.

You seem to be equating "prestige" in a topic with being an expert in a topic - the two are not necessarily related.

eg the more outrageous or unusual the claim from an "expert" (hence the less likely to be right), the more memorable that claim will be, or the more likely it will get attention. And the more someone is a "nobody", the more likely that their numerous eventually wrong claims will be dismissed or forgotten about compared to the memorable times some random was correct by accident.

Likewise I find the more certain someone is of something that is still uncertain, the more likely they will be to be wrong. The alternative of wishy washy consensus full of qualifications doesn't report well if at all, and tends to have minor errors picked apart and amplified even while broadly correct overall.

Re: Experts from a world that no longer exists

#95

Post by paulpauper »

antod wrote: post #94
paulpauper wrote: post #75

Whether it's finance, geo politics, economics or even Covid, I have found that experts tend to have terrible track records. The same people today who are predicting Bitcoin will go to 250k in four years, made that very prediction four years ago. These people are being paid large sums of money to produce worse insights and worse performance that even random bloggers or random posters on r/wallstreetbets. It's hard to…

To me that kind of observation seems subject to all kinds of biases. You seem to be equating "prestige" in a topic with being an expert in a topic - the two are not necessarily related. eg the more outrageous or unusual the claim from an "expert" (hence the less likely to be right), the more memorable that claim will be, or the more likely it will get attention. And the more someone is a "nobody", the more likely tha…

>n. And the more someone is a "nobody", the more likely that their numerous eventually wrong claims will be dismissed or forgotten about compared to the memorable times some random was correct by accident.

I think this applies more to some subjects than others. I think math and physics experts have a much greater claim to epistemological certainty than political or finance experts. The vast majority of political experts were wrong both about trump getting nomination, wrong about him winning ,and then were wrong about the economy doing well under Trump. I think nobodies in finance and politics can do as well, if not better ,than experts.

Re: Experts from a world that no longer exists

#96

Post by sidlls »

msla wrote: post #91
sidlls wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's more than a little ageist. Age has little to do with it. I've worked for--and been managed by--thick-headed, egotistical 20-somethings and stodgy older folks alike. Youth who think they're forging new territory usually aren't, but there are plenty who think they are and have an arrogance about it that is insufferable.

> Youth who think they're forging new territory usually aren't But that's part of the point of the article: The territory actively changes, so even if it's the same location in some sense, it's still new territory, ripe for exploration. Old people can see that, but it requires looking with fresh eyes, as opposed to only being willing to see what was there decades ago.

I don't see how doubling down on the ageism brings anything to the discussion. Old people aren't "only...willing to see what was there decades ago."

Re: Experts from a world that no longer exists

#97

Post by paulpauper »

smitty1e wrote: post #5
gorwell wrote: post #3

There was an amusing example of this yesterday with The Economist saying, `The sharp increase in inflation over the past year has blindsided many economists. Almost no one saw it coming` https://twitter.com/TheEconomist/status/1461651190144503808

ZeroHedge has predicted 83 of the last 7 downturns.

more like 83 of the last 2 downturns

Re: Experts from a world that no longer exists

#98

Post by anm89 »

Hilarious that he had to write all of this just to be able to sneak in a justification for MMT in the last paragraph.

This is a complete fallacy. Don't listen to reason or experts, the world has changed! Don't worry about debt and deficits, we've invented fiscal policy(which has been around since forever), that old wisdom no longer applies!

Believe it if you want. We live more or less in a society with free markets where, at least for people with saved wealth, individual outcomes can be highly variable by your personal ability to understand these systems and allocate your wealth effectively. If you think MMT is great and will have no consequences, then allocate your money accordingly. I'm going to assume that's not true.

Just like everything else time will tell who was right.

Re: Experts from a world that no longer exists

#99

Post by mnl »

paulpauper wrote: post #78
mnl wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We tend to romanticise it, but in the end it's just another job. It shouldn't, because selling you doing science is not the same as doing science, but on the other hand social expectations are that you must have a job, so what kind of exemption were we hoping for exactly? Once you realise it's ordinary people looking for whatever ordinary people look for anywhere else everything falls into place. Some science gets do…

Academia can be likened more to a clergy or priesthood than a job. Although academics are expected to publish, it's not like the results or output are as tangible or quantifiable compared to most jobs.

Well, it's not that. Output is quantifiable and expected, try to survive doing your thing before tenure (at least and don't). Alas, the Republic of Letters is long gone. Kind of an ought-is problem.

Re: Experts from a world that no longer exists

#100

Post by msla »

sidlls wrote: post #96
msla wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Youth who think they're forging new territory usually aren't But that's part of the point of the article: The territory actively changes, so even if it's the same location in some sense, it's still new territory, ripe for exploration. Old people can see that, but it requires looking with fresh eyes, as opposed to only being willing to see what was there decades ago.

I don't see how doubling down on the ageism brings anything to the discussion. Old people aren't "only...willing to see what was there decades ago."

I didn't imply they were. You're seeing insults I never made.
Post reply on HN