Welcome to Game Mode!
Select your challenge level:
Type missing words.
Enter to skip. Backspace to replay.
What does it take to make bold decisions when the odds aren’t clear? Statistician Nate Silver explains why the best risk-takers aren’t reckless. They’re strategic, evidence-driven, and comfortable acting without perfect information. Silver shares habits that separate success from failure in competitive environments, to help you become more comfortable with risking it all.
Select your challenge level:
Type missing words.
Enter to skip. Backspace to replay.
Your score is:
The River is my name for this community of like-minded people that I kept encountering over and over again in competitive domains. Las Vegas, Wall Street, Silicon Valley. They are very risk-taking. They can be contrarian. They can be difficult and very high-variance, I would call it. Meaning, it can lead to both tremendous success and a huge amount of failure. Because most of the time you think of somebody, “Oh, they’re quantitative and analytical.” You might think, “Oh, they’re, like, an actuary or an accountant.” Right? “They’re very calculating and cautious.” Right? And some people have that, but when you instead cross that with using that to compete, you get this more dynamic, Riverian personality.
So, I talked to around 200 people for On the Edge, people who are domain experts, people who are practitioners, who take risk themselves in different fields. I identified 13 common habits I’m going to distil down to just a few of my favourites.
My name is Nate Silver. I’m various things: a statistician, a poker player, and an author, most recently of ‘On the Edge: The Art of Risking Everything’.
So, a lot of people in the River are contrarian. They kind of have to be by design. In Silicon Valley, you’re making an investment in a category or a company that has not succeeded yet, and that maybe is dismissed by the rest of the marketplace, at least in public markets. What I say is that you want to be a conscientious contrarian, which means it’s okay to deviate from the consensus, but most of the time, the wisdom of crowds is pretty smart. So, like, the markets are hard to beat because it’s the consensus of lots of smart people on Wall Street and lots of smart modellers. And so, when do you have robust evidence for a particular direction? That’s kind of like part art and part science. You’re not relying on any one model, any one faction politically, any one philosophy, because people are error-prone, right? And one thing you learn if you’re betting sports, for example, is that you want multiple pieces of evidence to line up the same way. If you have two models, your average is better than one model. That’s what makes things robust is when you have multiple indicators, where they all flash in the same direction.
Another habit of good risk-takers is that they’re good estimators and good at working with incomplete information. The world moves pretty fast these days, and having a pretty good estimate quickly is often better than having a perfect estimate more slowly, right? If you’re dealing with things like markets, any competitive system, a small business that you’re running, you want to be first to market, or early to market at least. And that means that you can’t wait for all the data to show up. You have to know where the most reliable data points are early on and take real risk based on your estimation skills.
You ultimately do have to quantify your decisions to be able to make calculations. It kind of comes second nature if you’re a poker player. If you face a big bet and the bet’s for 200 bucks, right, and there’s 200 bucks already in the pot, that means you have to win the pot one-third of the time, 33 percent of the time. If you think you’re going win 34 percent of the time, you’re supposed to call. 32 percent, you’re supposed to fold. How do you tell between 34 and 32? Well, you have a lot of freaking practice because poker players play thousands and thousands of hands, but, like, it’s a very necessary skill to be explicit about this kind of thing, even if it’s back-of-the-envelope to get there, right? The output nonetheless has to be a number, and you have to make a decision based on that number.
One of my favourite aphorisms is take a raise-or-fold attitude toward life. So, look, you have 3 choices in poker. You can raise, call, or fold. People who have never played poker before — all they ever do is call. They call, call, call. They’re very passive, not taking control of the hand. If you ask a computer, it will say, most of the time you want to either be raising or folding, right? You want to take an aggressive action or quit.
I think this is a great metaphor for lots of things in real life, too. Annie Duke, a former poker player who now studies decision-making and writes as an author for a living, wrote a book called Quit, which is lots of evidence about how people are actually happier a lot of times when they quit.They quit an unhappy relationship, or a job that’s not working out, or they move cities, right? That allows you to preserve your capital, your decision-making power, your optionality. Giving yourself what may turn out to be fruitful or good decisions later on when you have more information to work with.
The world is a pretty intrinsically challenging and uncertain place, and that’s kind of why the people, the countries, the companies that will survive are people that are comfortable in uncertain environments. People are often uncomfortable with that kind of uncertainty.And so, people are seeking out safety given how complex and how confusing, admittedly, the kind of environment can be, when I think that might be a mistake, actually. If you are privileged enough to fail and then get back on your feet several times, then that’s a reason to take more risk.
(End)
In this text, there are several examples of pseudo cleft sentences using noun phrases (‘pseudo’ meaning they have a different structure to typical it + be cleft sentences). Cleft sentences are complex sentences used to emphasise a particular part of a sentence, or the whole sentence.
Cleft sentences beginning with ‘it’
In normal cleft sentences, we emphasise different elements of a sentence by ‘fronting’ them, moving them to the front: it + be (is/ was) + emphasis
For example: ‘She asked me to help with the homework.’
‘It was me who she asked to help with the homework. (emphasis = me)
‘Pseudo’ cleft sentences beginning with ‘what’
We can use a ‘what’ clause + ‘be’ + emphasis to focus attention on a specific verb, noun, or a whole sentence. The emphasis is on the part outside of the ‘what’ clause.
For example: ‘We arrived late and missed the flight. I hate airport food.’
‘What I hate most is airport food.’ (emphasis on the noun = airport food)
We can also replace ‘what’ with ‘where/why/who/how’, or different noun phrases, such as: ‘the person’, ‘the reason’, ‘the thing’, ‘one thing/ factor/ reason’, ‘all’ etc. to emphasise a noun or verb when using a cleft sentence:
‘All he does is complain about how busy he is.’ (emphasis on the verb and verb phrase)
These structures are helpful in writing to compensate for the lack of vocal stress or intonation.
When speaking, stress the key information with your voice (e.g., “One thing I NEED is a COFFEE.”).
Examples in the text:
© 2024 All rights reserved
Please Log In to use this feature.
Please log in to create a lesson plan.