He has a clear bias for instance the “Aside: if this ends early, note the people who told you that it would long and big, and remove them as advisors” wouldn’t it also be the case if this doesn’t end early to note the people who said it be short and small and removed them as advisors?
But interesting analysis none the less.
One of the defining feature of the Good Judgment Project was that the best forecasters tended to suffer more from intellectual humility than hubris. This is a largely unknown situation, so I suspect our scientists, economists and policy makers would be better served by not attaching themselves to rigidly to particular strategies, and instead adapting as information becomes available. Part of the challenge with this is that our media love people to be absolutely super duper certain about how the future will play out, and then hammer them when it either doesn't or people change their mind. That's not healthy at all. We need to be okay with people, even if they're our ideological opposites, saying they're wrong and doing something differently.
Last edited: