= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
James_Miller comments on [Link] My Interview with Dilbert creator Scott Adams - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (27)
I agree with your first paragraph, but Adams has described how his Trump writing has decimated his ability to earn money as a public speaker because people who hire such speakers want to avoid controversy. Adams appearing on the podcast of an obscure college professor was an act of altruism.
So you think he assigns a lower probability to Trump winning than someone unfamiliar with his argument might suppose? In theory he might have lost more than 2mill * 0.38 = 760000, but the higher that probability goes the worse your argument sounds.
No, I think Adams assigns a higher probability to Trump winning than most people do. I think Adams accepted this theory on Trump would cost him money.
Can't remember where I saw it, but I think Adams is trying to transition his career to "trusted expert".
He's willing to take the financial hit to make the transition.
Yes
Why do you think it costs him money? Adam is a blogger. He get's money from doing things that grab attention.
I think he made far more from giving corporate speeches (based on his Dilbert fame) than he ever will from blogging. Adams has said that his association with Trump has destroyed his speech making side-business.
He did make money from giving corporate speeches based on Dilbert fame but he could charge more money if he's the guy who is understands persuasion really well and if good at objectively looking and issues and gives corporate speeches based on that angle than he could make if he makes money based on his Dilbert frame.
Nassim Taleb layed out in anti-fragile that moves making moves that draw controversy is an effective strategy as a public intellectual. Ryan Holiday describes in "Trust Me I'm lying" as well that this is an effective strategy for people wanting to be public intellecutals.
I think Adam's likely read both Nassim Taleb and Ryan Holiday and made a conscious choice to follow that playbook. It might have turned out to be an ineffective move in reality because it turns out that giving speeches as "the guy behind Dilbert" isn't anti-fragile but it still rather looks like a deliberate move.
Adams did say that, but I agree with Daniel that he benefits hugely if Trump wins. Claims and reality are often different, especially when you consider that Adams is often transparently using his techniques in his writing.