Stanford Seminar - Entrepreneurial Thought Leaders: Nassim Taleb
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 16 เม.ย. 2013
- In this seminar, entrepreneurial leaders share lessons from real-world experiences across entrepreneurial settings. Speakers include entrepreneurs, leaders from global technology companies, venture capitalists, and best-selling authors. Half-hour talks are followed by a half hour of class interaction.
Explore all Stanford Online Courses and Programs: online.stanford.edu/explore
Learn more about Stanford's eCorner: ecorner.stanford.edu
Learn more about Stanford's online classes and certificates: online.stanford.edu/programs
See the full playlist: • MS&E472 - Entrepreneur...
#nassimtaleb
From the Dominican Republic, following Mr. Taleb closely, his advices and wisdom. I met him the first time, when I was reading the cristicism on financial math on Wikipedia...from that time on, I've been following him.
He's my favorite author in investing, along with Peter Schiff.
First 2 minutes pure slap-stick hilarious.
Absolutely well done and definitely keep it up!!! 👍👍👍👍👍
WOW, around 42:30 this becomes plain inspiring!
This Lecture benefitted from Randomness.
From the moments the hiccups came, then he closes the laptop, and suddenly good questions can come in and he got more elegant and the lecture was not a lecture anymore.
this is pure gold
It's not eatable no?
-No.
Well, thank.
I like this guy.
Haha he has been very vocal of his disdain for any sort of awards ("as they debase the pursuit of knowledge"). Kept it right back!
what about the cost of convexity? this talk assumes free optionality
👌🏾
I caught a fat tail once. ;)
🤣
So, systems are antifragile, and individual components are fragile?
No, he is saying that for a system to become more robust (less fragile or moving towards anti-fragile), its smaller components must be fragile. For instance, the countless cells in your body (fragile individual components) are dying every second just to replaced by new ones in order to make your body (the system) more robust i.e live longer. It is important to note that the term 'system' and 'individual components' depends on your scale of perspective. If I apply this example to a larger scale, I could say that a society (the system) becomes more robust because of the death and rebirth of human individuals (fragile individual components). Or even larger scale, such as humanity (system) becomes more robust with each death and rebirth of a civilization (fragile individual components).
@@RookieN08 Very nice clarification. I think there is no total antifragility. System becomes more antifragile when exposed to random events. But eventualy even the known universe could be shaken by some event. Crucial element is time. The faster (more often) events occur, the smaller the impact, more robustness is gained. The universe has all time it needs, but one, who wants to use this philosophy during the lifetime, could expose himself for as much small random events, as possible. Without an illusion, that you can plan your life, and your exact path to the goal.
BTW, I love this part of TH-cam.
@@noredbull1 "I think there is no total antifragility". You're right. There is indeed a limit to anti-fragility which Nassim Taleb has mentioned in his book and some of his videos.
RookieN08 I just realised, that every random event creates different outcome. And those outcomes are the tools. Be it skills, trading options or diversity in nature. Diversity of tools, used in creative way, helps to create new combinations of tools, which helps solve random problems more easily. It is better to have a toolbox instead of one expensive hammer, if the problem is unknown yet. Charlie Munger often talks about this.
@@RookieN08 When the small components refuses to die due to fragility, it became, well, cancer.
It takes a brave man to fly in the face of 2000+ years of "logic". IMHO Mr Taleb is doing nothing more than trying to remind us; Post hoc ergo propter hoc. And THIS is taken by the "experts" as heresy. Okay. He is making a few other key points. ;)
it's not luck, it's a convex function of luck
OMG, doubling the assets of one of the funds he manages during the worst financial crisis in the history of finance makes him SUCH a loser! It's not like everyone else was losing their shirts or anything. Making money while most people were losing money (including many "smart" people) seems to confirm his theories, but what do I know, facts and common sense are over hyped.