You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

VoiceOfRa comments on Open thread 7th september - 13th september - Less Wrong Discussion

4 Post author: Elo 06 September 2015 10:27PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (146)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: VoiceOfRa 14 September 2015 01:35:52AM *  4 points [-]

There's another category:

  1. Early warning signs of potential black swans you want to adept to, e.g., popping market bubbles, bank freezes, bail-ins.

This is not a special case of 1 since by the time everybody's talking about these things it's generally too late to take effective action.

Comment author: Vaniver 14 September 2015 02:50:43PM 0 points [-]

I think none of the things you mentioned are black swans--market bubbles have popped before, banks have frozen before, bail-ins have (I think?) happened before--but I agree that 'impending catastrophes' is a category of things one would like to have the earliest warning of.

The low-probability piece, though, is not the news source but the ability to interpret the information better than everyone else. It seems to me that for the areas one knows well, this probably falls into 2 and 3--if you run a company that depends on online software, you should probably be paying attention to sources that will give you early warning of security issues. But will you be any better at interpreting political news than anyone else? And is the 'political risk insurance' worth the cost? (You pay attention and time periodically, in the hopes that you will lose less if something goes wrong.) Certainly everyone agrees that it would have been nice to have insurance when something goes wrong, but that doesn't mean it's a good idea looking into the uncertain future.

Comment author: Lumifer 14 September 2015 03:42:53PM 1 point [-]

the ability to interpret the information better than everyone else

I don't think it's necessary to be better than everyone else. You only need to be better than most and that's not a particularly high bar to clear.

For example, look at the two recent financial crises in the Eastern Mediterranean: the Cyprus bail-in and the Greek bank freeze. Clearly some people saw it coming and got out; and clearly some people sat there twiddling their thumbs and going err... maybe... I dunno... my neighbour says it's going to be fine... -- and those people got caught and paid the price. You want to be in the first group, but you are not going to be alone in that group.

And is the 'political risk insurance' worth the cost?

That obviously depends on where you live. The calculations for someone who lives in, say, Norway and someone who lives in Lebanon are going to be very different.

Comment author: drethelin 14 September 2015 06:39:52AM 0 points [-]

Can you give examples of people profiting from these early warning signs by reading generic news as opposed to being experts in that field?

Comment author: VoiceOfRa 14 September 2015 07:57:43AM 3 points [-]

Well, all the Greeks who took their money out of the banks before capital controls were introduced, to cite the most well-known recent example.