Customer reviews

4.4 out of 5 stars
4.4 out of 5
3,712 global ratings
5 star
59%
4 star
29%
3 star
10%
2 star
2%
1 star
1%
How customer reviews and ratings work

Customer Reviews, including Product Star Ratings help customers to learn more about the product and decide whether it is the right product for them.

To calculate the overall star rating and percentage breakdown by star, we don’t use a simple average. Instead, our system considers things like how recent a review is and if the reviewer bought the item on Amazon. It also analyzed reviews to verify trustworthiness.

Learn more how customers reviews work on Amazon

Review this product


View Image Gallery
Customer image
Amazon Customer
5.0 out of 5 stars
Images in this review

Reviews with images

See all photos
Previous page
  1. Customer Image
  2. Customer Image
Next page

Submit a report

A few common reasons customers report reviews:
  • Harassment, profanity
  • Spam, advertisement, promotions
  • Given in exchange for cash, discounts
When we get your report, we'll check if the review meets our Community guidelines. If it doesn't, we'll remove it.
Report
Cancel
Sorry we couldn't load the review
Thank you for your feedback

Sorry, there was an error

Please try again later.
Close

Read reviews that mention

nate silver bayes theorem climate change well written stock market global warming big data great book must read real world making predictions great read job of explaining highly recommend black swan weather and earthquakes required reading presidential election new information bayesian statistics
  • Top reviews

Top reviews from the United States

There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.

Abacus
5.0 out of 5 stars The beauty of Bayes applied to many domains
Reviewed in the United States on October 25, 2012
Verified Purchase
This book is similar to Steven Levitt's  Freakonomics: A Rogue Economist Explores the Hidden Side of Everything (P.S.) , Nassim Taleb's  The Black Swan: Second Edition: The Impact of the Highly Improbable: With a new section: "On Robustness and Fragility" , and James Surowiecki's  The Wisdom of Crowds . All four books explore the intersection of data, human behavior, and outcomes. They explain how to quantify outcomes within the financial markets, professional sports or elections.

This book is especially interesting because Nate Silver has honed firsthand his statistical skills onto numerous domains including professional poker, baseball performance forecasting (he developed one of the best software program to do that), political elections (his "fivethirtyeight" blog). And, when he is not a firsthand practitioner he is a first class investigator.

The first seven chapters cover the errors and successes people have had in forecasting in various disciplines. Chapter eight is the most pedagogical, as the author explains the basics of Bayes Theorem that he considers as an overall solution to many of the errors we make in forecasting. The last five chapters focus on Bayesian thinking within various disciplines.

Nate Silver's coverage of the credit rating agencies "Catastrophic failure of prediction" (first chapter title) is excellent. In a single sentence on page 13, he captures the cause of the financial crisis: "In advance of the financial crisis, the system was so highly leveraged that a single lax assumption in the credit rating agencies played a huge role in bringing down the whole global financial system." Silver states that the AAA rated CDOs were deemed to have a default rate of only 0.12%. The actual default rate was 28% or over 200 times greater! This was because the rating agencies missed out the correlation between mortgage default rates at different locations when a nationwide home price downturn hit (see figure 1.2 on page 28. Watch out that he mislabeled column 3 and 4 from the right). Silver assesses that overall leverage was too high during the housing bubble. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac had a debt-to-equity leverage of 70-to-1. Lehman Brothers and other investment banks were leveraged over 30-to-1. Borrowers had often loan-to-value ratios of 100% on their homes. The volume of credit default swaps, MBS, CDOs represented 30 to 60 times the volume of home sales during the bubble years (fig. 1.5 page 35). Nate Silver summarizes the errors made. Investors trusted the rating agencies. The rating agencies assumed home prices would never decline on a nationwide basis because they never had since the Great Depression. Lenders and borrowers believed rising home prices would bail them out through refinancing. Policymakers believed the financial system had enough capital and was self-disciplined. And, economists completely missed the ensuing severe recession.

Nate Silver focuses next on political predictions. This field of experts was so bad at predicting it motivated him to enter it by starting his fivethirtyeight blog. He documents their failings extensively. Within this chapter he refers to the theory of Philip Tetlock, professor of psychology and political science at Berkeley. Tetlock had surveyed predictions of experts in various fields. And, he categorized them within two archetypes: the hedgehogs and the foxes. The hedgehogs are dogmatic, rarely change their minds, and are very confident of their forecast. The foxes are just the opposite. They update their forecasts as often as new information warrants it. As a result, they make better forecasts.

The chapter on baseball is one of the best because of Silver's extensive firsthand experience. He uncovers many concepts applicable to many sports such as the age-curve of baseball performance (pg. 81). All sports have a predetermined age-curve. Actually, every single aspects of life including life itself have predetermined age-curves. His description of what it takes to be a successful professional baseball player (pg. 97) has also surprisingly broad applications. The conclusion of the chapter is also fascinating. It describes baseball management as a competitive arms race of intelligence gathering to extract small competitive edges. And, that those competitive edges are short-lived. That's a very interesting application of the Efficient Market Hypothesis.

The chapter on economists documents how inaccurate their forecasts are. The majority can't forecast a recession that has already started as they missed out on the three most recent ones (1990, 2001, 2007). In November 2007, the average economic forecast was 2.4% real GDP growth in 2008. Instead, real GDP shrank by -3.3%. Economists assigned only a 1-in-2000 chance of the economy shrinking that much. Yet, home prices were already declining. Foreclosures had picked up. Bear Stearns had gone belly up six months ago. Those were powerful signals the housing and financial markets were on the edge of a cliff. Also, economists are way too confident. The few times you can extract confidence intervals from the economic profession they are invariably way too narrow because they underestimate the error level within their forecasts (pg. 182). Nate Silver states that: "this property of overconfident prediction has been observed also in medical research, political science, finance, and psychology" (pg. 183). Despite our having so much more data and computer power at our hands, economic forecasting has not improved since 1968. This is because our underlying understanding of cause and effects has not changed much since.

Chapter 8 introduces Bayes's Theorem. Here Nate Silver often refers to a very good book on the subject: 
The Theory That Would Not Die: How Bayes' Rule Cracked the Enigma Code, Hunted Down Russian Submarines, and Emerged Triumphant from Two Centuries of Controversy  by Sharon Bertsch McGrayne.

Chapter 9 and 10 about chess and poker are excellent. Kasparov was ultimately beaten by a computer bug. IBM Big Blue made a move late in the last game that did not make any sense (the team who programmed it confirmed it was due to a small programming bug). Kasparov who was in a vulnerable position could not figure out that move and in despair resigned the game and lost the series. The Pareto principle of prediction on page 312 and 314 and the ensuing economics of poker are really interesting. Poker winning are heavily dependent on the one worst player at a table. If he leaves, the winnings are a lot harder to reap.

Chapter 11 on the Efficient Market Hypothesis (EMH) is excellent. Nate Silver states that the stock market is efficient most of the time, although it is never perfectly efficient (that would preclude a market). But, it can be wildly inefficient on few occasions associated with bubbles and crashes. Nate Silver demonstrates how both technical analysis and fundamental analysis do not beat the market over the long run. Fig 11.3 on page 340 shows no correlation between the performance of mutual funds over the 2002 to 2006 period vs over the 2007 to 2011 period. Past performance is no guarantee of future returns. Next, Silver refers to Robert Shiller in showing the market is not as efficient as the EMH entails. Shiller looked at the P/E ratio of the S&P 500 over a trailing 10 year period and looked at prospective returns. And, the longer the period contemplated the greater the negative correlation between trailing P/E levels and future average yearly returns. This suggests that the market can get overvalued. But, the return correction is not apparent until looking at average return over a 10 to 20 year period. Next, Nate Silver refers to the works of Richard Thaler and Daniel Kahneman in behavioral economics to outline how market traders are not perfectly rational. They suffer from herd mentality, overconfidence, and being overly emotional rendering their trading pro-cyclical.

So, if the market is not so efficient, can you beat it? Probably not. On page 345, Nate Silver demonstrates how a hypothetical investor with perfect timing over a decade (1976-1986) would get killed by very small transaction costs. Even though this investor would handily beat the stock market before transaction costs, he would wipe out most of his capital after transaction costs. Silver next tests a prudent investment strategy over the 1970 to 2009 period. He assumes an investor is prudent and sells his position in the S&P 500 index whenever it had declined 25% from its peak and reinvests whenever it recovered 90% of its value. Such an investor would have earned only 2.6% per year vs close to 10% for a simple buy-and-hold strategy. Nate Silver does believe several hedge funds can beat the market. But, they have intellectual and technological resources that no retail investor and few mutual funds can match.

Chapter 12 on climate change is really interesting. He differentiates between where scientists agree and disagree. They all agree that the greenhouse effect exists and keeps the Earth warmer than it would otherwise be; that temperatures have risen over the past century; that greenhouse gases have contributed to that trend; and that water vapor is by far the most potent greenhouse gas (not CO2 as the Media conveys). The majority of scientists agree that rising CO2 concentration does contribute to rising temperature. But, there is a debate regarding how much. Where the scientific community is more divergent is regarding climate models and projections. They acknowledge that Al Gore's 
An Inconvenient Truth  deterministic apocalyptic message was way off base.

Nate Silver explains why there is much uncertainty regarding climate models' projections. One uncertainty is figuring out CO2 levels 100 years down the road. Another uncertainty is getting the causal relationships right (there is a lot more than CO2 at play). Another uncertainty concerns whether those models are programmed correctly. Within the vast quantities of computer codes, are there a few bugs that contribute to generating erroneous forecasts? Nate Silver reviews the prediction of the IPCC's 1990 model and observes that temperatures have not risen as fast as the model predicted. Current temperatures are below the model's 95% confidence interval. This lead the IPCC to reduce their baseline temperature increase from 3 degree Celsius per century in 1990 to 1.8 degree in 1995. On page 407, Silver comes up with an interesting application of Bayes theorem applied to rising temperature predictions.

The last chapter on terrorism is intriguing. Terrorist attacks follow a similar Power Law as earthquakes. The frequency of events declines exponentially with increase in intensity. More violent events are much rarer than lesser ones. But, the few major events dominate the data in human casualties. For instance, 9/11 represented more than half of the total fatalities from terror attacks in NATO countries since 1979. Thus, it is worth exploring means of mitigating the impact of such events.
Read more
Robert Morris
VINE VOICE
5.0 out of 5 stars How and why, more often than not, "human judgment is intrinsically fallible"
Reviewed in the United States on January 16, 2018
Verified Purchase
This book was first published in 2012, at a time when Big Data (or if you prefer, big data) was only beginning to receive the attention it deserves as a better way to use analytics within and beyond the business world. One key point is that big data should also be right data and in sufficient quantity. I recently re-read the book, in its paperbound edition. Thde quality and value of its insights have held up remarkably well.

In the years that followed publication of the first edition, as Nate Silver notes in the new Preface, the perception that statisticians are soothsayers was proven to be an exaggeration, at best, and a dangerous assumption, at worst. This new edition "makes some recommendations but they are philosophical as much as technical. Once we're getting the big stuff right -- coming to a better [i.e. more accurate and more reliable] understanding of probability and uncertainty; learning to recognize our biases; appreciating the value of diversity, incentives, and experimentation -- we'll have the luxury of worrying about the finer points of technique."

In the Introduction to the First Edition, Silver observes, "If there is one thing that defines Americans -- one thing that makes us exceptional -- it is our belief in Cassius' idea that we are in control of our own fates." In t his instance, Silver refers to a passage in Shakespeare's play, Julius Caesar, when Cassius observes:

"Men at some time are masters of their fates.
The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars,
But in ourselves, that we are underlings."
(Act 1, Scene 2, Lines 146-148)

Cassius' assertion has serious implications and significant consequences. It is directly relevant to a theory named after Reverend Thomas Bayes (1701–1761), who first provided an equation that allows new evidence to update beliefs in his An Essay towards solving a Problem in the Doctrine of Chances (1763). Silver: "Bayes's theorem is nominally a mathematical formula. But it is really much more than that. It implies that we must think differently about our ideas [predictions, for example] -- and how to test them. We must become more comfortable with probability and uncertainty. We must think more carefully about the assumptions and beliefs that we bring to a problem."

Silver cites another passage in Julius Caesar when Cicero warns Caesar: "Men may construe things, after their fashion / Clean from the purpose of things themselves." According to Silver, man perceives information selectively, subjectively, "and without much self-regard for the distortions this causes. We think we want information when we want knowledge." I take "want" to have a double meaning: lack and desire. Silver goes on to suggest, "the signal is the truth. The noise is what distracts us from the truth. This is a book about the signal and the noise...We may focus on those signals that advance our preferred theory about the world, or might imply a more optimistic outcome. Or we may simply focus on the ones that fit with bureaucratic protocol, like the doctrine that sabotage rather than an air attack was the more likely threat to Pearl Harbor."

In their review of the book for The New Yorker (January 25, 2013), Gary Marcus and Ernest Davis observe: "Switching to a Bayesian method of evaluating statistics will not fix the underlying problems; cleaning up science requires changes to the way in which scientific research is done and evaluated, not just a new formula." That is, we need to think about how we think so that we can make better decisions.

In Thinking, Fast and Slow, Daniel Kahneman explains how an easy question ("How coherent is the narrative of a given situation?") is often substituted for a more difficult one ("How probable is it?"). And this, according to Kahneman, is the source of many of the biases that infect our thinking. Kahneman and Tversky's System 1 jumps to an intuitive conclusion based on a “heuristic” — an easy but imperfect way of answering hard questions — and System 2 lazily endorses this heuristic answer without bothering to scrutinize whether it is logical). And this, according to Kahneman, is the source of many of the biases that infect our thinking. System 1 jumps to an intuitive conclusion based on a “heuristic” — an easy but imperfect way of answering hard questions — and System 2 lazily endorses this heuristic answer without bothering to scrutinize whether it is logical.

When an unprecedented disaster occurs, some people may feel at least some doubt that they are in control of their fate. Nate Silver offers this reminder: "But our bias is to think we are better at prediction than we really are. The first twelve months of the new millennium have been rough, with one unpredicted disaster after another. May we arise from the ashes of these beaten but not bowed, a little more modest about our forecasting abilities, and a little less likely to repeat our mistakes."

A Jewish proverb suggests that man plans and then God laughs. The same could be said of man's predictions.
Read more

See more reviews

Top reviews from other countries

Translate all reviews to English
Jean-Luc Py
5.0 out of 5 stars Clever and subtle
Reviewed in France on December 23, 2012
Verified Purchase
N. Silver is no amateur forecaster: he designed a system for forecasting performance of baseball players and set up a web site predicting election results (he also happens to have played poker at a semi-professional level).

The book is full of insights on the pitfalls that forecaster can fall into. But, it also contains a bounty of solutions (notably derived from Bayesian statistics). Effortlessly, N. Silver guides us to subtle and clever ways on how we can improve our prediction abilities (and recognize our limitations!). Let me just give a very small sample of how the book helps us grasp what should be understood:
* Understanding the difference between a prediction and a forecast, as illustrated by earthquakes.
“A prediction is a definitive and specific statement about when and where an earthquake will strike […] Whereas a forecast is a probabilistic statement, usually over a longer time scale.” (p. 149)
* Understanding what “overfitting” is, i.e. designing a model that explains, data-wise, more than is actually possible or actually exists (a good image of the trait of human nature leading us to make such mistakes is that of recognizing animals in clouds), and the unsound confidence that it triggers (p. 167)
* Understanding that you ignore unknown unknowns (as the phrase was coined by D. Rumsfeld) at your own risk.
“There is a tendency in our planning to confuse the unfamiliar with the improbable […] what looks strange is thought improbable” (p. 419)

N. Silver uses a very wide array of topics and references to make his points. He is most of the times well versed in such topics but yet falls prey to his unrealistic ambition of being a true polymath ; two instances of factual mistakes I noticed are:
* “not only were Estonians sick of Russians, but Russians were nearly as sick of Estonians, since the satellite republics contributed less to the Soviet economy than they received in subsidy from Moscow.” p. 52
At the time of USSR, stating that Estonia received subsidies from Russia (rather than being plundered) is a wrong pick ; subsidies may have existed for some republics (such as the “–stan” republics) or countries (such as Cuba) but not Estonia the richest and most advanced of the soviet republics…
* The description of the first 3 moves of the 1st game of the Kasparov – Deep Blue match is mistaken, with one move missing (and the figure 9-2 showing the position correspondingly erroneous ; the white g-pawn is misplaced) p. 270

Anyhow, these mistakes are minor and do not alter my overall vey positive assessment of the book!
Read more
Eric Lawton
5.0 out of 5 stars I predict the people who should read this book, won't
Reviewed in Canada on November 11, 2012
Verified Purchase
You will hear a lot more about this book now that the author is becoming famous for his accurate prediction of the US election.

The book makes a compelling case for why we all need to learn more about statistics in order to better understand the world, and it also helps you learn at least the basics of what you need to know.

The first half explains why we often make enormous mistakes in our reasoning because we see patterns which aren't there - the apparent signal which is really an accident of the noise (there is no man in the moon - we just interpret random craters and flood plains that way). It makes a convincing case why we need to read on.

Once he has got us to understand how we make so many errors, he introduces us to the way out: Bayesian statistics.

I had tried before to get the idea behind Bayesian statistics but until I read this, I was not doing so well because I don't have the spare time to learn another whole branch of mathematics. By using many real world examples from sports and gambling, he leads us step-by-step, without equations, to understanding the basic principles and gave me the ability to see where I might be going wrong. You might need some more books before you can work the math yourself to come up with the kind of outstanding bets Nate Silver has made, as he tells us how he was able to beat the odds at betting on baseball thorough the use of statistical reasoning, but at least you'll know where you and others are going wrong and have some idea on how to start on better answers.

The title of this review is based on my sad realisation that the kind of people who want the simple answers that Silver demonstrates are not there are not the kind of people who read this type of book where better answers are to be found. The Canadian government famously claims "We don’t govern on the basis of statistics.". This book explains why that is the main basis on which they should govern.

There are a few claims in the book which I think are wrong. He occasionally wanders off into philosophical musings - for example claiming that Bayes Theorem somehow shows that Bayes theorem will become more widely accepted. No, it doesn't, if only because there are many people like those mentioned above who won't even bother to try to learn. However, the book certainly contains enough evidence that we would be better off if it does become the basis of more of our decisions and enough explanation that you will be much wiser in your decisions when you have finished.

Strongly recommended.
Read more
Sailor Dunc
3.0 out of 5 stars Good but for traders, not rich fishing ground
Reviewed in Canada on April 2, 2014
Verified Purchase
There was much noise about Nate Silver's power of "prediction" in the arena of U.S. political horse races. His own passionate mastery weighing data and opinion to form valuable probabilistic assessments from sports to politics indicated he himself was a signal. Grounded odds commentary in a sea of superficial punditry and knee jerk betting. The gift of this well written, easy to follow work is it adds to the education on the probabilistic nature of probably everything.

Interviewing leading lights in diverse fields, the book romps from climate to earthquakes to terrorism to markets. He draws from his own card-counting all-nighters in the early days of online poker to both chaos and complexity theory to illustrate the lessons. All good. The limited 3 stars given here is only from the point of view of a trader. This one area gets quickie sound bytes. It makes a few valid points about the strength of the prediction of the Efficient Market Hypothesis. The near impossibility of "beating the market" over the long term - the tangle of noise in the short term. As if hedging his bets, he alludes parenthetically that passing "inefficiencies" ARE likely being profitably exploited. He gestures an especially dismissive sneer toward "chartists", quips more confidently about index funds, and hurries on to change the subject.

Our loss. While there are authors who HAVE contributed with more depth/balance to probabilistic approaches to market theory and trading, so much more can be done in this area. Markets surely form one of the historically richest examples of noise versus signal. Of the roles of luck and skill, the interaction of myth and fact. The caldron of complexity that makes up a market and causes "agreed" prices to endlessly ebb and flow. Fundamental analysis is just as prone to "prediction" traps as any other approach. The wager behind a P/E ratio or all the interpretations about "the numbers", management, products and prospects are often just as subjective, wild (or too late) as any "chartist's" assessment of the course actual prices may be charting. What separates signal from noise participants is more the skills one brings or does not bring to the data. How one responds to the market's evolving reactions. Some calls go amiss not because prediction "failed", implying a Holey ("if only" one had foreseen the future better) Grail, but because the call BANKED too much on prediction in the first place.

Silver touches on markets long enough to point out it is one of those areas where uncertainty must always be huge. Those that act otherwise find out what really "stays in Vegas". As in going fishing, seriously, the task is to catch fish. Not BE the fish. Nice read. Other probabilists bring deeper insight to market waters. Fish on!
Read more
Tiago Irineu
5.0 out of 5 stars Many examples about probabilistic thinking, with an underlying defense of Bayesian statistics
Reviewed in Brazil on August 30, 2021
Verified Purchase
The book could a bit more of theoretical discussion, but it gives a reasonable introduction to probabilistic thinking and how it is used or mis(used) in daily life, with examples ranging from sports to financial markets.

Given Nate's background it is not surprising that he focuses on forecasting, and how to develop a better framework for becoming a better forecaster, and also how a lack of probabilistic education and communication lead people astray, even leading to mistake that cost lives of thousand of people.

My ultimate take of this book would be that we should consider more deeply the possible impacts of probability in our lives, and also that data does not speak for itself. Data need context and for gaining real insights it's necessary to apply critical thinking to it.
Read more
Francisco Inacio Bastos
5.0 out of 5 stars Livro brilhante, bem escrito e divertido
Reviewed in Brazil on December 10, 2020
Verified Purchase
Por razões profissionais e também por gosto, leio com frequência livros de estatística, tanto técnicos como de divulgação. Raras vezes tive a oportunidade de ler algo tão claro, bem escrito e bem-humorado. Confesso não ter gostado muito do capítulo sobre a estatística do baseball, mas isso se deve tão-somente ao fato de achar o esporte incrivelmente monótono (obviamente, os fãs do esporte deverão adorar o referido capítulo). Feito esse reparo, absolutamente pessoal, os demais capítulos são ótimos, por vezes, brilhantes (não há outra definição), com uma exposição incrivelmente clara sobre estatística bayesiana e suas inúmeras aplicações práticas.
Read more

See more reviews