Nate Silver The Signal And The Noise book sales have skyrocketed by 850% on Amazon.com in the last 24 hours sales , according to CNNMoney reports. The Signal And The Noise: Why So Many Predictions Fail-but Some Don’t is now the second best selling book on the site, behind only children’s book, ‘The Third Wheel, Diary of a Wimpy Kid Book 7.
Prior to the election, Nate Silver’s statistical methodology was called into question by pundits skeptical of his reliance on polling data, including David Brooks of the New York Times and MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough. Silver’s model that is based on poll aggregation correctly forecast the winner in all 50 states. Florida, which he gave Obama a 50.3 percent chance of winning, is still up in the air, but the 50.3 percent forecast more or less accounts for that.
The Signal and the Noise: Why So Many Predictions Fail-but Some Don’t – Review
From the Amazon reviewer Darryl Campbell:
People love statistics. Statistics, however, do not always love them back. The Signal and the Noise, Nate Silver’s brilliant and elegant tour of the modern science-slash-art of forecasting, shows what happens when Big Data meets human nature. Baseball, weather forecasting, earthquake prediction, economics, and polling: In all of these areas, Silver finds predictions gone bad thanks to biases, vested interests, and overconfidence. But he also shows where sophisticated forecasters have gotten it right (and occasionally been ignored to boot). In today’s metrics-saturated world, Silver’s book is a timely and readable reminder that statistics are only as good as the people who wield them.
Comments related to The Signal and the Noise book:
Tom Ontis · Top Commenter · San Francisco State University
With cocked left forefinger, sort of Southern accent: “…Arithmetic.’
Reply · 1 ·
· 3 hours ago
Dennis Flomo · Top Commenter · IT Production Business Analyst at Health Data Insights
It’s simple math…now conservatives can believe in polls, math, science, innovation and investment. Foxnews need to hire Nate Silver… Hennity and bill orielly have 1/3 of Silver’s brain.
Reply ·
· 4 hours ago
Robin Brenizer · Top Commenter · Co-Founder/Managing Partner at The Wilson Ellis Company
Lesson to the right, never, ever listen to the predictions of those that have money on a horse. Nate didn’t have money in this game. Just his reputation. Karl Rove had millions on the line.
Reply ·
· 4 hours ago
Ed Steel · Boston Architectural College
hey Dylan…you were wrong about most everything…why are you still employeed?
Reply ·
· 6 hours ago
Chris Lin
nate silver, you a boss.
Reply ·
· 6 hours ago
Indrani Dutta-Gupta · Jadavpur University
A whiz kid out of UChicago, our son’s alma mater! Made us proud again.
Reply ·
· 6 hours ago
Donna Renn · Top Commenter · Pastor at The United Methodist Church
Nate Silver won big last night. After weeks of critics who couldn’t dispute his math and so went after him personally (“small” and “effeminate” come to mind as two of the comments in the press), he was finally vindicated. He’ll be walking onto the stage of the Daily Show in just a few minutes. I feel like Stewart needs to hand him a medal, or something ![]()
Reply ·
· 6 hours ago
Keith Fannin · Top Commenter · University of Southern California
Dylan, how hard is it to admit that you were wrong, that Nate Silver, analytical thinking, and math were vindicated, and that Silver was unnecessarily maligned by the very same people who claim that global warming isn’t real, President Obama is a Kenyan and a socialist, “drill baby drill” constitutes an actual long term energy policy, rape and resulting pregnancy are an act of God, and that tax cuts for the wealthy “create good paying America jobs” and “pay for themselves”.
It is time for republicans to let the helium out of their balloons and come on back down to earth. America needs two legitimate parties who both use silly things like facts and math to come up with innovative and effective policy solutions for the challenges we face. That can’t happen as long as republicans are determined to blindly deny any fact or basic common sense analysis that might challenge any aspect of the broad underlying tenets of its party philosophy.
Reply · 1 ·
· 6 hours ago
