The Signal and the Noise: Why So Many Predictions Fail - But Some Don't

Interesting book about forecasting, statistics, and why simply having more data is not going to result in better predictions. The writing is mostly entertaining and accessible to all, but if you're interested in the details there's enough there that I was able to correctly answer 3/4 questions on a Bayesian theory test a friend coincidentally posted on Facebook while I was reading this book.

The direction seems a little scattered though, it's more like a series of case studies or vignettes without a clear and cohesive direction. The most important information in the book (in my opinion) is Bayesian theory and how we can and should use it to keep our forecasts realistic; yet it isn't mentioned till over half way into the book and then isn't consistently emphasized through till the end. The rest of the book is examples of predictions gone right or wrong and examinations why; interesting but a little disjointed seeming at times. Still, very interesting read and worth picking up.

Given the technical nature of what Nate Silver does, and some of the early mentions of the book, I had higher hopes for the technical portions of the book. As usual for a popular text, I was left wanting a lot more. Again, the lack of any math left a lot to desire. I wish technical writers could get away with even a handful of equations, but wishing just won't make it so.

The first few chapters were a bit more technical sounding, but eventually devolved into a more journalistic viewpoint of statistics, prediction, and forecasting in general within the areas of economics, political elections, weather forecasting, earthquakes, baseball, poker, chess, and terrorism. I have a feeling he lost a large part of his audience in the first few chapters by discussing the economic meltdown of 2008 first instead of baseball or poker and then getting into politics and economics.

While some of the discussion around each of these bigger topics are all intrinsically interesting and there were a few interesting tidbits I hadn't heard or read about previously, on the whole it wasn't really as novel as I had hoped it would be. I think it should be required reading for all politicans however as I too often get the feeling that none of them think at this level.

There was some reasonably good philosophical discussion of Bayesian statistics versus Fisherian, but it was all too short and could have been fleshed out more significantly. I still prefer David Applebaum's historical and philosophical discussion of probability in [b:Probability and Information: An Integrated Approach|3623935|Probability and Information An Integrated Approach|David Applebaum|https://d202m5krfqbpi5.cloudfront.net/books/1266767217s/3623935.jpg|3666736] though he surprisingly didn't mention R.A. Fisher directly himself in his coverage.

It was interesting to run across additional mentions of power laws in the realms of earthquakes and terrorism after reading Melanie Mitchell's [b:Complexity: A Guided Tour|5597902|Complexity A Guided Tour|Melanie Mitchell|https://d202m5krfqbpi5.cloudfront.net/books/1348191495s/5597902.jpg|5769253], but I'll have to find some texts which describe the mathematics in full detail. There was surprisingly large amount of discussion skirting around the topics within complexity without delving into it in any substantive form.

For those with a pre-existing background in science and especially probability theory, I'd recommend skipping this and simply reading Daniel Kahneman's book [b:Thinking, Fast and Slow|11468377|Thinking, Fast and Slow|Daniel Kahneman|https://d202m5krfqbpi5.cloudfront.net/books/1317793965s/11468377.jpg|16402639]. Kahneman's work is referenced several times and his book seems less intuitive than some of the material Silver presents here.

This is the kind of text which should be required reading in high school civics classes. Perhaps it might motivate more to be interested in statistics and science related pursuits as these are almost always at the root of most political and policy related questions at the end of the day.

For me, I'd personally give this three stars, but the broader public should view it with at least four stars if not five as there is some truly great stuff here. Unfortunately a lot of it is old hat or retreaded material for me.