[LanguageGamer]

From a business perspective, the volatility of Silver's models seem like a feature - they enhance the drama / sensationalism of election coverage. One week, he's telling me candidate X will likely win, the next week it's candidate Y, and I'm on the edge of my seat.

If Silver really believed these probabilities were correct, he should be willing make bets with these odds, otherwise his incentives are distorted.

[et2o]

Nate Silver's business' reputation (538) is predicated on making accurate predictions. He certainly has "skin in the game."

In fact, perhaps his entire livelihood.

[throwawaymath]

> If Silver really believed these probabilities were correct, he should be willing make bets with these odds, otherwise his incentives are distorted.

Yes, the "skin in the game" argument. That is Nassim Taleb's calling card. Personally, I consider it a little unreasonable to expect people to literally put their money where their mouth is every time they make a forecast.

[dictum]

It's a kind of ad hoc censitary suffrage. One can only put possessions on the line if they have them, and the greater one's possessions, the greater their perceived "skin".

[throwawaymath]

Yeah I get the idea, I just don't like that it encourages dismissal of opinions which aren't backed by some form of collateral.

[jandrese]

Isn't that just new polling data being introduced into the model? It seems disingenuous to say Nate Silver is being sensationalist when he's applying fresh new data to his models and seeing changes in the outcomes.

[chrismanfrank]

Yes, this is the source of the disagreement. Silver, I think, probably gets the math. But his aim is to entertain.

Taleb's aim is something like predictive rigor. God knows why he cares about Silver. I think everyone gets that Silver is doing entertainment.

[jarcane]

A hell of a lot of people in 2016 sure as shit didn't.

Funny how he's now "just entertainment" after such a public and embarrassing misfire.

[JamesBarney]

What was the public and embarrassing misfire?