I agree that contrarians ’round these parts are often wrong more often than academic consensus, but the success of their predictions about AI, crypto, and COVID prove to me its still worth listening to them, trying to be able to think like them, and probably taking their investment advice. That is, when they’re right, they’re right big-time.
contrarianism is not what lead people to be right about those things.
edit 1yr later: specifically, carefully reasoning through the implications is what lead them to be right. contrarianism might have lead them to a habit of carefully reasoning through implications, but people who were contrarian by default need not be right about them, whereas someone reasoning carefully does tend to end up right even when a correct claim is already popular or vice versa.
I agree that contrarians ’round these parts are often wrong more often than academic consensus, but the success of their predictions about AI, crypto, and COVID prove to me its still worth listening to them, trying to be able to think like them, and probably taking their investment advice. That is, when they’re right, they’re right big-time.
contrarianism is not what lead people to be right about those things.
edit 1yr later: specifically, carefully reasoning through the implications is what lead them to be right. contrarianism might have lead them to a habit of carefully reasoning through implications, but people who were contrarian by default need not be right about them, whereas someone reasoning carefully does tend to end up right even when a correct claim is already popular or vice versa.