[bedobi]

Your relevant article doesn't even get the first paragraph right. The Efficient Market Hypothesis doesn't mean eg that markets result in efficient use of resources or societally efficient/optimal outcomes, which the author seems to imply.

[logicprog]

Well, the idea of the EMH (as I understand) is that the stock prices for things should be at an optimal price already and trying to beat market prices is basically a game of chance. Since one of the examples he gives is about the stock market and investing, I don't think his offhand statement is that far off.

More importantly, that's not really Central to the argument of the book he's reviewing or the argument of his post itself, it's a mostly irrelevant detail that you've picked on for no discernable reason.

[TeMPOraL]

I'm going to quote the first paragraph here:

> Eliezer Yudkowsky’s catchily-titled Inadequate Equilibria is many things. It’s a look into whether there is any role for individual reason in a world where you can always just trust expert consensus. It’s an analysis of the efficient market hypothesis and how it relates to the idea of low-hanging fruit. It’s a self-conscious defense of the author’s own arrogance.

And then quote again the only reference to the EMH:

> It’s an analysis of the efficient market hypothesis and how it relates to the idea of low-hanging fruit.

How, just how can you say something 'bedobi upthread? It's frankly a "fake news" level comment. I hate those, because it looks legit enough that people will take the lie at face value.