[hackuser]

Agreed, to an extent (though not every 'expert' is equally reliable). Two ways I look at it:

1) Generally, the nature of a bubble is that nobody knows when it will pop. People knew about the U.S. asset bubble in the mid-2000s for years, but even those not caught up in the bubble mass psychology couldn't accurately predict when it would collapse. The same was true of the dot-com bubble around 2000. You can be right that there is a bubble, but be far wrong about when it ends.

2) There was a stock broker looking for new business. He cold called 512 people (he must have been a quant); half he told to sell X stock, half he told to buy. The next week he called the 256 for whom he'd made the right prediction and did the same again: Half he told to sell, half to buy ... several weeks later he was down to 16 people. He called all of them and said, 'look, I was right 5 times in a row ...'.

[sopooneo]

I believe this was actually the plot of an episode of the kids educational show "MathNet"* in the early 90's. I've often wondered if people just do this over email now, but automated. And why write to just 512 people about who's going to win tonight's football game, when you can have your script write to 1,048,576? Or does this happen?

* Actually a show within the actual show "Square One TV"

[zeusk]

> There was a stock broker looking for new business. He cold called 512 people (he must have been a quant); half he told to sell X stock, half he told to buy. The next week he called the 256 for whom he'd made the right prediction and did the same again: Half he told to sell, half to buy ... several weeks later he was down to 16 people. He called all of them and said, 'look, I was right 5 times in a row ...'.

Except, what you just described is a scam and not something a registered broker can do.

[llukas]

At least not something that registered broker can do more than once.

FTFY

[ars]

It sounds more like a parable, not an actual story.

The point is that if enough people make prediction, some of them will right over and over and over - even though it's all random.

[hackuser]

> a parable

Ha, that's a great observation; I hadn't thought of it. On one hand, I'm very uncomfortable with any implied comparison to the most well known practitioner of parables. On the other, many others have used the form. Maybe I'll write all my HN posts in parable form - 'those who have ears to hear' will understand; the others I won't have to deal with. I could use it for business emails too.

Coming up with that many parables might be challenging.

[pjc50]

Call it a fable, then.

It's a really effective technique for getting a point across to most people if they'll give you the time to listen and you're a good storyteller. It's a bit less effective in highly nerdy spaces but still worth doing.

[scandox]

Gotta say (as a non Christian) nothing wrong with Jesus' reasoning and storytelling skills. Just a case of one bad axiom I guess.

[hackuser]

To be clear, I wasn't uncomfortable with the implied comparison because I have something against Jesus or the Gospels. I was uncomfortable because I don't want anyone to think for a moment that I am comparing myself to him. (I'm not.)

[ars]

If it helps, when I said "parable" I had no idea that Jesus would in any way be implied. I had never even heard of his parables before your reply.

I actually replied to you ask who you were referring to, since I had no idea, but then another comment said who it was so I deleted my reply.

I clearly am never going to be able to use the word "parable" again. I'll say fable from now on, even though fables have animals in them, not humans.

[usefulcat]

Or if one person makes enough predictions..

[pfarnsworth]

I think this was in The Wolf of Wall Street or some other stock market related movie.