/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.15161654]

>*btfos your favorite pseud*

[Anonymous No.15161678]

>>15161654
May favourite pseud is Taleb.

[Anonymous No.15162012]

>>15161654
Is that Sudipta Kaviraj in that picture? People never knew he was that swarthy ?

[Anonymous No.15162039]

>is an arab

[Anonymous No.15162758]

>>15161654
>things happen

[Anonymous No.15162780]

how do I put my Skin In The Game?

[Anonymous No.15162882]

>>15161654
>>doesn't believe in race and iq
>>is proud to be a lebanoncunt

he does BTFO wagecucks
so I'm conflicted

[Anonymous No.15163047]

>>15162882
how does he btfo wagecucks? give me a summary

[Anonymous No.15163111]

>>15163047
Virgin Wagecuck
>has to wear a uniform, can't say (or be perceived to be saying) racist or sexist or indeed anything off-brand or get's pulled up by HR, can't increase extra earnings. Supposedly for income security, but if the company downsizes or if he crosses HR he still loses everything
Chad Freelancer
>no uniform, can say whatever he likes doesn't answer to HR, if they find a desperate client can up their price. Big trade off is income insecurity, but finds it much easier to pivot - not at the mercy of the all powerful company
In real life Freelancers aren't as anti-fragile as he claims. But that anon is right, he does BTFO wagies

[Anonymous No.15163118]

>>15163111
>>15163047
Actually let me TL;DR
>Wagecucking has virtually no 'upside', and only the illusion of insulated downside in the form of income security, but you can still lose your salary and therefore aren't protected from downside.

[Anonymous No.15163349]

Any easy summary of his iq critique. I can't understand his statistics points at all?

[Anonymous No.15164238]

>>15163349
It's same critique anti-IQ people have had since the beginning of IQ testing.
>stops correlating as well with life-incomes around the 120 level, so more useful to find retards than to find geniuses
>having a high IQ just means you're good at taking IQ tests and you're also probably an obedient bureaucratic cuck
>I'm not an Arab

[Anonymous No.15164246]

These keep getting better.

[Anonymous No.15164260]

He's unironically based and everyone should read his works. I've started to question everything I've read and understood. Chomsky + Taleb = You're golden.

[Anonymous No.15164270]

>>15164260
He's worth reading if only because he'll motivate you to go back to the classics.

[Anonymous No.15164318]

>>15164260
Chomsky is mediocre (outside of linguistics), but Taleb is really good because his ideas can be applied to a vast number of areas, simply because they deal with complex systems generally, and thus it can guide your thinking in politics, health, what books to read next, how to structure your personal projects, investments etc. The degree of uncertainty that he adds to our understanding is also very good for demolishing fake monocultures, including academic ones (psychology, economics, traditional historiography and others).

[Anonymous No.15164376]

>>15164318
>>15164260
Where do I start with Taleb ?

[Anonymous No.15164394]

>>15164376
The guy has like 4 relatively short books, Jesus Christ. People like you are insufferable. In the time it took you to ask this asinine question (which has been asked hundreds of times before) you could've downloaded the entire Incerto and start reading.

[Anonymous No.15164402]

>>15164318
I disagree. Chomsky is good to understand media bias and propaganda. Taleb teaches how bad living in a bubble is the dominance of IYI frauds.

[Anonymous No.15164409]

i can’t wait to come back here in 2 years when lit has had their fill of this guy and even passively liking him will have you labelled as a ‘pseud retard’

the cycle never ends

[Anonymous No.15164464]

>>15164409
I read and liked The Black Swan in around 2010 or so and read Antifragile after it came out not long after. I still like the guy and he's been discussed on /lit/ before, although this is a new wave of popularity.

[Anonymous No.15164479]

>>15164376
Incerto

[Anonymous No.15164496]

>>15164402
Chomsky is a fucking gatekeeper man, he’ll say media is biased but only Fox News and a couple of others while defending rad left propaganda networks

[Anonymous No.15164505]

>>15164464
>this is a new wave of popularity
Thanks to his views becoming progressively contrarian over the years, mentioning him is an easy way to start an Internet argument, which is now being exploited by a small amount of trolls that pleasure themselves over their threads' reply counters.

[Anonymous No.15164533]

>>15164376
The Swedish Investor on youtube

[Anonymous No.15164621]

>>15162780
You could probably start by reading the book.

[Anonymous No.15164631]

>>15163118
This is definitely true, but what’s to be taken from this? Not everyone can freelance successfully.

[Anonymous No.15164665]

>>15164402
Yeah, Chomsky's criticism tend to point in the right direction, but he's extremely biased and specializes on cherry-picking. As for his positive philosophy, well... His anarcho-syndicalism is... Well... See for yourself.

>>15164376
I recommend starting with Antifragile.

After Antifragile you can read The Black Swan.

Then leave Skin in the Game for later because it's the most pleasing one to read.

Fooled by Randomness is unnecessary, in my view, because all the points in it are later re-introduced the following books. Also, it's written in a more ''pop sci'' style, so it's boring. But you won't lose nothing by reading it, I guess.

>>15164409
Won't happen.

[Anonymous No.15164868]

>>15164665
IIRC Taleb said the best way to read his books is randomly.

[Anonymous No.15164969]

>>15164394
Antifragile is 650 pages long man

[Anonymous No.15165131]

>>15164969
400, actually. More than 100 pages are references, notes and the technical appendix which you won't read.

[Anonymous No.15165136]

>retroactively refutes your favourite writer and/or philosopher and or/ political theoretician

[Anonymous No.15165287]

>>15162780
Put all your money on black

[Anonymous No.15165307]

>>15164238
This. Jonathan Pallesen if I remember his name correctly did a good breakdown of Talebs arguments against IQ. I still very much like Taleb and will buy his next book.

[Anonymous No.15165356]

>>15164969
Just read the first 100, he just repeats himself till the end.

[Anonymous No.15165417]

I had a dream last night I was at an event, and I saw Taleb on a balcony above me.
I shouted at him: "You are a fraud Taleb!"
He got incredibly angry. And I laughed

[Anonymous No.15165459]

>>15163349
>>15164238
>>15165307
>All the claims from the article that I looked at, that can be interpreted as something specific and tested in a real data set, turned out not to be correct. If Taleb hadn’t blocked everyone who disagrees with him, perhaps he would have found out about this, and not published a post with all these incorrect claims.
https://www.jsmp.dk/posts/2019-06-16-talebiq/

[Anonymous No.15165477]

>>15165356
No he doesn't you arab

[Anonymous No.15165491]

>>15164409
>even passively liking him will have you labelled as a ‘pseud retard’
Already happened

[Anonymous No.15165553]

>>15165459
Classic arab slight of hand

[Anonymous No.15165568]

>>15165459
The only one that is a proper, compelling refutal out of these is the one about grades. All the others are basically grasping at straws as the writer reaches very similar conclusions as Taleb but plays them up. I don't think he's going to lose much sleep over "no no there's a correlation it's just very small" and "no no in this hypothetical scenario the very small correlation is more pronounced"

[Anonymous No.15165575]

>>15165568
>talebfags can’t read anything longer than a twitter post without their eyes glazing over
explains why he writes his books the way he does

[Anonymous No.15165577]

>>15165568
Also, it doesn't address Taleb's main points about IQ being badly constructed to begin with or that IQ varies massively between tests for the same individual

[Anonymous No.15165656]

>>15163349
His statistics is obfuscation. He says that since successful people don't have particularly high IQ that means that IQ doesn't matter. This can just mean that our society is not meritocratic (and should be) and not that we should ignore IQ.

[Anonymous No.15165690]

>>15165656
btw, you *could* make a point that work ethics, morality etc *should* be just as important (if not more), but for him the statistics tells everything

[Anonymous No.15165707]

>>15165577
> IQ varies massively between tests for the same individual

Not really. You can get some improvements with repetition but still and IQ test is what it should be; a rough estimation of your capability to solve problems.

[Anonymous No.15165761]

>>15165707
This is not my claim but Taleb's, which is why I brought it up. If he set out to debunk the article that should have been the very first thing in line, even more so since I see Taleb didn't source it.
>Typical confusion: Graphs in Intelligence showing an effect of IQ and income for a large cohort. Even ignoring circularity (test takers get clerical and other boring jobs), injecting noise would show the lack of information in the graph. Note that the effect shown is lower than the variance between tests for the same individual!
>Psychologists do not realize that the effect of IQ (if any, ignoring circularity) is smaller than the difference between IQ tests for the same individual (correlation is 80% between test and retest, meaning you being you explains less than 64% of your test results. ).

[Anonymous No.15166036]

>>15165761
>there is not near perfect correlation thus this is useless

[Anonymous No.15166454]

taleb is an Arab we wuzzer. butthurt about the low IQ of his racial kin

[Anonymous No.15167680]

>>15166454
>Arab
>Taleb

[Anonymous No.15167754]

>>15165459
>>15165568
>>15165307
The "refutation" by Pallesen is hilarious. Taleb BTFO it in a single paragraph.
>Hack job by one Jonatan Pallesen, full of mistakes about this piece (and the “empiricism”), promoted by mountebanks such as Murray. He didn’t get that of course one can produce “correlation” from data. It is the interpretation of these correlations that is full of BS. Pallesen also produces some lies about what I said which have been detected in online comments (e.g. the quiz I gave and using Log vs X ).
(You can also find more on Twitter.)
>>15166454
>>15165553
He's not Arab; he is Phoenician.
>>15163047
>Those who do not think that employment is systemic slavery are either blind or employed.
— From Bed of Procrustes
>>15163349
Read Incerto and then read his medium article; it will make it a million times easier to understand.