Maybe - I don't tend to read books over and over again.
Not sure - he was a good narrator though.
Bayesian thinking. I've been familiar with Bayesian mathematics for a while but I'd never quite thought about applying it to probabilistic thinking the way Nate discusses it.
This book was an amazing read. Nate uses lots of great examples from a wide-variety of disciplines and professions to show the usefulness and limitations of statistics and prediction models.
I rather enjoy Massimo's writings and thoughts and this book reads much like his discussions with Julia and others. However Massimo does sometimes need somebody to keep him "on track" at times as he has a tendency to wander. Many topics are introduced and then "we'll come back to that later in this book." It can be difficult to keep track! But overall I'm quite happy to listen to Massimo wax philosophic on the topic of pseudoscience.
Yes - if I had friends who would like a philosophical discourse on the nature of science...
Massimo! But failing that Mike Chamberlain would have been better.
The narrator mispronounces a lot of words and some equations (e.g. "two times ten-twenty-three" rather than "two times ten TO THE 23" for scientific notation, and "chumsky" for "chomsky" which just sounds odd to me). Overall I felt the narrator could have done a lot better.
Report Inappropriate Content