= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
RobinZ comments on [Book Review] "The Signal and the Noise: Why So Many Predictions Fail—But Some Don’t.", by Nate Silver - Less Wrong Discussion
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
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d){kind=logo}
Comments (8)
I read it - I think the way I described it to the Less Wrong DC group was, "like an introductory Less Wrong article, except a book."
To elaborate a bit: * Pro: The writing is clear and engaging. * Pro: There's a lot of good case-study material and a bit of useful theory connecting them. * Con: The book is lacking in technical detail regarding Bayesian thinking (and his formulation of Bayes' Theorem is kinda messy). * Con: Nate Silver is more prone to claim successful predictors as being Bayesian thinkers than he justifies in the text. * Con: There are a few glaring typos in the first printing (e.g. a table on which the "Correlated" and "Uncorrelated" column headers are switched).
It's easy to read, and it's worth reading for the case studies, but I'd probably put it at a "Borrow" rather than a "Buy" recommendation.
ETA: The review you posted is good.