←back to thread

Learning not to trust the All-In podcast

(passingtime.substack.com)
369 points paulpauper | 1 comments | 06 Nov 24 17:14 UTC | HN request time: 0.208s | source
Show context
somethoughts ◴[06 Nov 24 21:12 UTC] No.42069467[source]▶
"But I know that I won’t be tuning in for the next episode of All-In to find out. I will not fall prey to Gell-Mann Amnesia."

Not sure if the author - Michael Bateman - will ever see this but if he does - just a thought - it could be an interesting and fertile genre/substack niche to do follow analysis of their claims/discussions in more detail regularly as a counterpoint to their podcast.

I found his analysis compelling and it could be popular among HNers.

replies(1): >>42072536 #
1. 27153 ◴[07 Nov 24 02:09 UTC] No.42072536[source]▶
Appreciate the comment. This is the author here. Unfortunately, due to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandolini%27s_law as pointed out by another comment, there is an asymmetry of effort in making vs finding/disproving false claims. I was just lucky to have been recently primed with the information to notice this mistake. My usual niche is writing about climbing and skiing, but if I'll be sure to share future thoughts in this realm.