More on this book
Community
Kindle Notes & Highlights
Read between
February 17 - June 28, 2021
These traders lose money frequently, but in small amounts, and make money rarely, but in large amounts. I call them crisis hunters. I am happy to be one of them.
There is something nonphilosophical about investing one’s pride and ego into a “my house/library/car is bigger than that of others in my category”—it is downright foolish to claim to be first in one’s category all the while sitting on a time bomb.
and do not seem to accept either the possibility of its occurrence or the dire consequences of such occurrence.
I have repeated that becoming more rational, or not feeling emotions of social slights, is not part of the human race, at least not with our current biology.
The virtue of capitalism is that society can take advantage of people’s greed rather than their benevolence, but there is no need to, in addition, extol such greed as a moral (or intellectual) accomplishment (the reader can easily see that, aside from very few exceptions like George Soros, I am not impressed by people with money).
The mistake of ignoring the survivorship bias is chronic, even (or perhaps especially) among professionals. How? Because we are trained to take advantage of the information that is lying in front of our eyes, ignoring the information that we do not see.
I showed how we tend to mistake one realization among all possible random histories as the most representative one, forgetting that there may be others.
Their sample only had survivors. They simply forgot to take into account the managers who went out of business.
Optimistic people certainly take more risks as they are overconfident about the odds;
How can we expect the untrained person to understand randomness when a Harvard professor who deals and teaches the concept of probabilistic evidence can make such an incorrect statement?
These people go back and unwittingly cheat with the statistics to justify their actions. In my business, they fool themselves with statistical arguments to justify their option selling.
People overvalue their knowledge and underestimate the probability of their being wrong.
I am just like every single character whom I ridiculed in this book. Not only that, but I may be even worse than them because there may be a negative correlation between beliefs and behavior (recall Popper the man). The difference between me and those I ridicule is that I try to be aware of it.
A book review, good or bad, can be far more descriptive of the reviewer than informational about the book itself.
The less you trust the ruler‘s reliability (in probability called the prior),the more information you are getting about the ruler and the less about the table.
gambling to me is best defined as an activity where the agent gets a thrill when confronting a random outcome, regardless of whether he has the odds stacked in his favor or against him.
This shows in the very sophisticated people one meets in casinos where they normally should not be found.
Check Richard Feynman account of professional gambler
we are not made to view things as independent from each other. When viewing two events A and B, it is hard not to assume that A causes B, B causes A, or both cause each other.
Again, compare them with Soros, who walks around telling whoever has the patience to listen to him that he is fallible.
Too bad Soros forgot about it, and now thinks he is infallible in politics
The scientist’s behavior while facing the refutation of his ideas has been studied in depth as part of the so-called attribution bias. You attribute your successes to skills, but your failures to randomness.
People confuse science and scientists. Science is great, but individual scientists are dangerous.
Dr. Fauci "attacks on me are attacks on science"
The only article Lady Fortuna has no control over is your behavior.
