Stock investing is not really investing. Basically a company offers some shares at $10 for example. The investment banker gives the company $8.50 and sells those shares to the public at $10 or more. Whether the stock goes up or down, the company only gets 8.50 to buy equipment, hire more people, e.g. invest in their business. Now if the stock goes to $1 it would be difficult for the company to sell shares next time vs $100 or $1000. Amazon stock lost up to 90% of their value in the early 2000s. The difference between Enron and Amazon is the fact that Amazon recovers later on and goes way way higher vs Enron going to zero. But you have to be a time traveler to know this.
I'm not sure the Fauci example is all that great because it depends on what we knew at the time. And that depends on what you mean by "knowing" something. There were some experts who argued for delayed second doses even before the UK (and Canada) decided to do it. They believed there was enough evidence without a study directly proving it.
Ultimately it comes down to what inferences are valid. The FDA doesn't accept handwavy analogies, but in real life we usually do. Many decisions of experts like doctors and investors are judgement calls.
I agree that the "correct" decision is the one you should have made based on the information you had at the time. I've read that in poker you can actually analyze your games this way, but that's only because the odds are computable. The problem is that we're not playing poker.
Probability calculations work for gambling because that's what probability was invented for. Or you could look it the opposite way: our games of chance are designed to make the probability work. The Romans didn't know that dice need to be fair.
You could make a spreadsheet that does computations for real-life decisions, but your outputs are only as good as your inputs, which are often guesses.
Even in retrospect, how could we calculate the probability that delayed second doses turned out to be a bad idea? That's imagining a universe that works differently than ours. What do you put in the spreadsheet?
“The truth is that all men really are created equal, as the saying goes. What it means is that all people, every identity group, is capable of the same foolishness and atrocities.”
Now I want to learn how to play Bridge.
Stock investing is not really investing. Basically a company offers some shares at $10 for example. The investment banker gives the company $8.50 and sells those shares to the public at $10 or more. Whether the stock goes up or down, the company only gets 8.50 to buy equipment, hire more people, e.g. invest in their business. Now if the stock goes to $1 it would be difficult for the company to sell shares next time vs $100 or $1000. Amazon stock lost up to 90% of their value in the early 2000s. The difference between Enron and Amazon is the fact that Amazon recovers later on and goes way way higher vs Enron going to zero. But you have to be a time traveler to know this.
So good Stephen!!
I'm not sure the Fauci example is all that great because it depends on what we knew at the time. And that depends on what you mean by "knowing" something. There were some experts who argued for delayed second doses even before the UK (and Canada) decided to do it. They believed there was enough evidence without a study directly proving it.
Ultimately it comes down to what inferences are valid. The FDA doesn't accept handwavy analogies, but in real life we usually do. Many decisions of experts like doctors and investors are judgement calls.
I agree that the "correct" decision is the one you should have made based on the information you had at the time. I've read that in poker you can actually analyze your games this way, but that's only because the odds are computable. The problem is that we're not playing poker.
Probability calculations work for gambling because that's what probability was invented for. Or you could look it the opposite way: our games of chance are designed to make the probability work. The Romans didn't know that dice need to be fair.
You could make a spreadsheet that does computations for real-life decisions, but your outputs are only as good as your inputs, which are often guesses.
Even in retrospect, how could we calculate the probability that delayed second doses turned out to be a bad idea? That's imagining a universe that works differently than ours. What do you put in the spreadsheet?
Thoughts on probability influenced by: https://metarationality.com/
I really needed the companionship of your thoughts today. Thank you.
I think this is your best yet. Love this line:
“The truth is that all men really are created equal, as the saying goes. What it means is that all people, every identity group, is capable of the same foolishness and atrocities.”