(That’s a review of the first version; the typos have been fixed in the second one. But if the book gets
⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️ with typos, you know it’s really good.)
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
The Lindy Principle, from Taleb's "Antifragile", uses age to infer information about life expectancy.
Here, I propose an intuitive justification and I explore practical uses other than estimating life expectancy.
(a thread, 1/N)
2/ For a person, every year of life reduces its conditional life expectancy. A 70 years-old is expected to live 14.4 more years, and a 71yo is only expected to live 13.7 more years.
Conversely, the longer a book is on the NYT bestseller list, the longer it's expected to stay.
3/ In Antifragile, building on Mandelbrot, Taleb writes the Lindy Principle as:
"For the perishable, every additional day in its life translates into a shorter additional life expectancy.
For the nonperishable, every additional day may imply a longer life expectancy."
Motivations: most other measures can be argued, "we did bad, because we took a different tradeoff". This one hardly can.
We can argue on tradeoffs re: top speed (eg, mandatory or voluntary? Everyone or at-risk-only?) but the initial acceleration should be a target for all.
The purpose wouldn't be, of course, to make a ranking. It's not a zero-sum competition.
Instead, it would be to be a benchmark, and an eye-opener on what's possible and on the opportunity costs of lacking competence.
2/ The paper argues that using web history & similar inputs could unlock access to lending services.
For example, someone who scores just not enough on traditional screening methods used by banks could be included thanks to a virtuous search history.
3/ The above is true. However, it also means that people who would be "in" thanks to traditional screening methods could be excluded thanks to a less-virtuous search history.
More importantly, who decides what's a virtuous search history?