Status Updates From Fooled by Randomness: The H...

We human has lots of bias. Anchoring bias, based on historical or some references point to make decisions. Survival ship bias, we haven’t imagine or care those failed or tick out of the count. Or we may fall into perception that something in a streak should contribute to some true reason but it could be purely random. Random pattern don’t need to have a pattern, eg 10 times keep winning or losing

When we saying the avg expected living age is 73, and I am 72, do I expecte to die next year ? No, as given condition I am 72 and healthy, I should expect a longer life as someone already dead contribute the avg living age. This is concept about average of a sample group. Different from probability. When the operation is 1% morality, it’s wrong to say 100% dying for the 100th patient

I don’t get his beef with journalists?? But go off I guess??

Maybe we could never draw a proper conclusion from the empirical data as outlier haven’t happened yet. But with understanding on the whole event and how the data being collected, it helps to reframe the problem and give hints from another angle. Why we are conducting such hypothesis, what we are going to proof. Try to question if the process is stupid, try to delete those not necessary, then optimize the problem

Problem on induction. I agree that we never can conclude something from only past empirical data but with one counter example we can disapprove. Also, we must understand why the data happen in this way before drawing conclusions. If car accident happen more frequently near neighborhood, there are still lots of info missing to answer why and the causality of the event