Idei interesante: 3/5
Coerență 1/5
Bonus: ironia tipică lui Taleb
O mare dezamãgire aceastã carte. Pe cât de savuroasã, dinamicã, neaşteptatã, plinã de chestii pe care sã le aplici în cele mai diverse situaţii este "Antifragile", pe atât de lâncezândã şi plictisitoare e aceastã carte care pare sã fie scrisã ca sã-şi facã Taleb lista de oameni care-i plac şi oameni care-l scot din sãrite. Ah, şi o ocazie ca sã se ia de saudiţi (în fine, partea asta te mai rãcoreşte dacã nici ţie nu-ţi plac saudiţii pentru cã sarcasmul lui Taleb e, neîndoielnic, mişto oricât de proast ar scrie). Mã gândesc cã avea mare nevoie de bani şi de aceea a scos chestia asta dubiaosã şi fãrã nici un dumnezeu (caz în care l-am iertat pentru cã e nasol sã nu ai bani).
Cartea are douã idei mari şi late, una e cea care dã titlul cãrţii şi care nu aduce nimic nou (trebuie luaţi în serios numai oamenii care au ceva de pierdut de pe urma a ceea ce sfãtuiesc sau învaţã pe alţii sã facã) şi alta (conceptul de “ergodicity”) care este introdusã printr-un paragraph (nespectaculos) ca mai apoi sã ni se repete toatã cartea cã încã nu suntem pregãtiţi sã înţelegem conceptul, pentru ca la final (când ar trebui sã fim, totuşi, pregãtiţi pentru spectaculoasa revelaşie) sã ne mai arunce un paragraf într-o doarã (la fel de nespectaculos ca şi primul). Iar restul cãrţii este despre cum îl enerveazã pe Taleb emiţãtorii de idei de genul lui Steven Pinker.
Rezumatul cãrţii din citate:
"[…] skin in the game is about honor as an existential commitment, and risk taking (a certain class of risks) as a separation between man and machine and (some may hate it) a ranking of humans. If you do not take risks for your opinion, you are nothing."
"[…] skin in the game means that you do not pay attention to what people say, only to what they do, and to how much of their necks they are putting on the line."
"Being reviewed or assessed by others matters if and only if one is subjected to the judgement of future -not just present – others.[…] Contemporary peers are valuable collaborators, not final judges."
"The Intelectual Yet Idion (IYI) is a product of modernity […] to reach a local supremum today, to the point that we have experienced a takeover by people without skin in the game. In most countries, the government’s role is between five and ten times what it was a century ago (expressed in percentage of gross domestic product). The IYI seems ubiquitous in our lives but is still a small minority and is rarely seen outside specialized outlets, think tanks, the media, and university social science departments -most people have proper jobs and there are not many openings for the IYI, which explains how they can be so influential in spite of their low numbers. The IYI pathologizes others for doing things he doesn’t understand without ever realizing it is his understanding that may be limited. He thinks people should act according to their best interests and he knows their interests, particularly if they are "rednecks" or from the English non-crisp-vowel class who voted for Brexit. When plebeians do something that makes sense to themselves, but not to him, the IYI uses the term "uneducated.""
Observaţii specific Taleb-iene care au o legãturã vagã cu subiectul cãrţii:
"[…] my heuristic is that the more pagan, the more brilliant one’s mind, and the higher one’s ability to handle nuances and ambiguity. Purely monotheistic religions such as Protestant Christianity, Salafi Islam, or fundamentalist atheism accommodate literalist and mediocre minds that cannot handle ambiguity."
"[…] when you read material by finance professors, finance gurus, or your local bank making investment recommendations based on the long-term returns of the market, beware. Even if their forecasts were true (they aren’t), no individual can get the same returns as the market unless he has infinite pockets […]This is conflating ensemble probability and time probability."
"A bank in New York sends a married employee with his family to a foreign location, say, a tropical county with cheap labor, with perks and privileges such as country club membership, a driver, a nice company villa with a gardener, a yearly trip back home with the family in the first class, and keeps him there for a few years, enough to be addicted. He earns much more than the "locals," in a hierarchy reminiscent of colonial days. He builds a social life with other expats. He progressively wants to stay in the location longer, but he is far from the headquarters and has no idea of his minute-to-minute standing in the firm except through signals. Eventually, like a diplomat, he begs for another location when time comes for a reshuffle. Returning to the home office means loss of perks, having to revert to his base salary – a return to lower-middle-class life in the suburbs of New York City, taking the commuter train, perhaps, or, God forbid, a bus, and eating a sandwich for lunch! The person is terrified when the big boss snubs him. Ninety-five percent of the employee’s mind will be on company politics… which is exactly what the company wants. The big boss in the board room will have a supporter in the event of some intrigue."
Si preferata mea:
"I have a finite shelf life, humanity should have an infinite duration. I am renewable, not humanity or the ecosystem."
Niciun comentariu:
Trimiteți un comentariu