Nate Silver • On the Edge: The Art of Risking Everything

in general our predictive errors come in thinking that there is more certainty in the world than there really is.

clever people sought to measure, in data bits, the amount of information produced in

That means that we have a better chance of successfully competing with superstars if we see them as unthreatening as they see us.

Instead of physics or biology, however, electoral forecasting resembles something like poker: we can observe our opponent’s behavior and pick up a few clues, but we can’t see his cards. Making the most of that limited information requires a willingness to update one’s forecast as newer and better information becomes available. It is the alternative

The numbers have no way of speaking for themselves. We speak for them. We imbue them with meaning. Like Caesar, we may construe them in self-serving ways that are detached from their objective reality. Data-driven predictions can succeed—and they can fail. It is when we deny our role in the process that the odds of failure rise. Before we demand mo

Foxes, Tetlock found, are considerably better at forecasting than hedgehogs.