Scott Alexander examines how public predictions are judged over time, using examples like Nostradamus and Fukuyama to illustrate common pitfalls and offer advice on making predictions. Longer summary

Scott Alexander explores the phenomenon of how people's predictions are judged over time, using Nostradamus and Francis Fukuyama as contrasting examples. He discusses how Nostradamus's vague prophecies are often interpreted as accurate in hindsight, while Fukuyama's 'end of history' thesis is frequently declared wrong whenever significant events occur. The post then analyzes other public figures' predictions and their reception, before offering advice on how to make predictions that won't damage one's credibility or cause personal misery. Scott concludes by acknowledging that he wants to make more predictions himself, while warning aspiring thought leaders about the challenges of public prediction-making. Shorter summary

Scott explores the concept of antifragility in relation to libertarianism, introducing 'diversity libertarianism' to analyze issues like corporate censorship and religious pressure on businesses. Longer summary

Scott Alexander expands on the concept of antifragility from Nassim Taleb's book, applying it to libertarianism and corporate censorship. He introduces the idea of 'diversity libertarianism,' which favors high variance in options for areas where people can freely choose, but low variance for systems prone to catastrophic failures. This framework is used to analyze issues like corporate censorship and religious pressure on businesses, arguing that libertarians can consistently support diverse corporate policies while opposing coordinated censorship. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander reviews Nassim Taleb's 'Antifragile', which explores the concept of benefiting from disorder across various domains and critiques modern attempts to reduce volatility. Longer summary

Scott Alexander reviews Nassim Taleb's book 'Antifragile', which introduces the concept of antifragility - things that gain from disorder and volatility. The book explores this concept through various domains including finance, evolution, exercise, and government policy. Taleb argues that many modern systems and approaches, in trying to reduce volatility, actually increase fragility to large shocks. The review discusses Taleb's critique of academia, his preference for practical knowledge over theory, and his views on the benefits of smaller, decentralized systems. Scott compares Taleb's ideas to other thinkers like James Scott and David Chapman, seeing 'Antifragile' as part of a broader intellectual counterculture questioning conventional approaches to knowledge and governance. Shorter summary