[SkyMarshal]

>start with a total platitude (rare events happen),

That's not exactly what he says. He doesn't care about whether an event is rare or frequent, but only in combination with its consequences/impact. His main point is that we're not good at assessing the risk/costs of rare but high-impact events, that our statistical and modelling tools are insufficient for that domain too, and thus we tend to be complacent in our decision making about them. He implicitly argues it's not a platitude because we keep getting it wrong on large scales.

Fwiw his best short problem statement may be this essay in Edge.org from ~10yrs ago: https://www.edge.org/conversation/nassim_nicholas_taleb-the-...

[pillefitz]

So basically value at risk? I don't quite see how our current tools are insufficient

[SkyMarshal]

He's covered both those points extensively since the GFC, not worth rehashing. If you care to, you can find it all in the technical section of his site at https://fooledbyrandomness.com/FatTails.html.

Taleb is publicly, deliberately abrasive and annoying. When evaluating his work you have to conscientiously get yourself into a mindset of ignoring the messenger and focusing on the message. Don't let his personality induce bias into your analysis of his work. But at least he's made that easier by providing extensive technical documentation, "The Technical Incerto Vol I & II", in the sidebar of his site linked above.

[pillefitz]

Thanks a lot! Indeed, I couldn't get around reading the first few chapters of one of his books because of his tone. I might reconsider

[SkyMarshal]

Yeah, just skip his popular lay books if they annoy you and focus on the technical works underpinning his philosophies. They still have a few injections of his personality here and there, but it’s mostly drowned out by technical exposition.