WEBVTT - Cautionary Questions with Nate Silver and Maria Konnikova

0:00:15.564 --> 0:00:16.044
<v Speaker 1>Pushkin.

0:00:24.364 --> 0:00:27.244
<v Speaker 2>Hey everybody, Nate here, I'm dropping into your feed on

0:00:27.284 --> 0:00:30.004
<v Speaker 2>a Tuesday because Marie and I were recently guests on

0:00:30.084 --> 0:00:34.524
<v Speaker 2>Cautionary Tales. Normally, on that show, economist Tim Harford tells

0:00:34.564 --> 0:00:37.924
<v Speaker 2>us stories of real world mistakes, things like the Birmingham

0:00:38.004 --> 0:00:40.964
<v Speaker 2>Lab League and the Tenrife air disaster, and what lessons

0:00:41.004 --> 0:00:43.444
<v Speaker 2>we can learn from them. When Marie and I appeared,

0:00:43.484 --> 0:00:46.724
<v Speaker 2>Tim had us answer questions from Cautionary Tales and Risky

0:00:46.804 --> 0:00:50.444
<v Speaker 2>Business listeners. They're smart, they're fun, and we're excited to

0:00:50.484 --> 0:00:53.404
<v Speaker 2>be sharing the full episode with you today. Hope you

0:00:53.604 --> 0:00:55.444
<v Speaker 2>enjoy and be sure to check out the rist of

0:00:55.484 --> 0:00:57.484
<v Speaker 2>Cautionary Tales wherever you're listening to this.

0:01:03.204 --> 0:01:07.004
<v Speaker 3>Hello, and welcome to another episode of Cautionary Questions. I

0:01:07.084 --> 0:01:10.564
<v Speaker 3>team up with clever people to answer you clever questions,

0:01:10.844 --> 0:01:14.164
<v Speaker 3>and this time I'm joined by Nate Silver and Maria Konnikova.

0:01:14.524 --> 0:01:17.764
<v Speaker 3>They are the hosts of the Risky Business podcast and

0:01:18.044 --> 0:01:21.684
<v Speaker 3>they are here to answer questions from both sets of listeners.

0:01:22.164 --> 0:01:24.604
<v Speaker 3>Nate is a political analyst. He's the author of On

0:01:24.724 --> 0:01:28.004
<v Speaker 3>the Edge, and Maria is the best selling author of

0:01:28.084 --> 0:01:31.524
<v Speaker 3>the Biggest Bluff. How I Learned to Pay attention master

0:01:31.604 --> 0:01:36.004
<v Speaker 3>myself and win both fantastic books. Both Nate and Maria

0:01:36.124 --> 0:01:40.444
<v Speaker 3>are also journalists, and they are both high stakes poker players.

0:01:40.724 --> 0:01:43.404
<v Speaker 3>I'm a journalist too and an undercover economist, and I'm

0:01:43.404 --> 0:01:45.364
<v Speaker 3>not much of a poker player. But between us, we

0:01:45.364 --> 0:01:47.884
<v Speaker 3>should have some good answers for all of the smart

0:01:47.964 --> 0:01:51.004
<v Speaker 3>questions that you've been sending in. We will be tackling

0:01:51.044 --> 0:01:55.244
<v Speaker 3>smartphones in schools, tariffs, and how to use game theory

0:01:55.444 --> 0:01:59.564
<v Speaker 3>to win at sports. Nate, Maria, welcome to Cautionary Tales.

0:01:59.964 --> 0:02:01.324
<v Speaker 2>Thank you, Tom, Thanks so much.

0:02:01.364 --> 0:02:01.804
<v Speaker 1>Tom.

0:02:02.124 --> 0:02:05.204
<v Speaker 3>Well, should it be cautionary business or risky tales, risky

0:02:05.324 --> 0:02:09.804
<v Speaker 3>risky cars, risky cassion. That's good. You've been po casting

0:02:09.844 --> 0:02:10.684
<v Speaker 3>for how long?

0:02:11.004 --> 0:02:11.604
<v Speaker 1>About a year?

0:02:11.964 --> 0:02:14.084
<v Speaker 2>About a year? Yeah, we're coming up on the World

0:02:14.164 --> 0:02:18.124
<v Speaker 2>Series of Poker begins in every May, and so yeah,

0:02:18.164 --> 0:02:20.204
<v Speaker 2>we launched it just about a year ago. When we're

0:02:20.244 --> 0:02:23.724
<v Speaker 2>coming up in our second World Series season, excellent, When

0:02:23.804 --> 0:02:24.244
<v Speaker 2>Nate and I.

0:02:24.204 --> 0:02:26.644
<v Speaker 1>Are both at the final table of the main event,

0:02:26.684 --> 0:02:31.044
<v Speaker 1>that'll be really great for our Risky Business podcast audience growth.

0:02:31.244 --> 0:02:33.644
<v Speaker 3>Would you be podcasting from the World Series if you're

0:02:33.644 --> 0:02:34.524
<v Speaker 3>on the final table?

0:02:34.724 --> 0:02:38.364
<v Speaker 1>Not at the final table? Since there are no phones allowed, but.

0:02:38.604 --> 0:02:39.324
<v Speaker 3>We'll find a way.

0:02:39.404 --> 0:02:41.124
<v Speaker 2>I mean, we do have these long days right where

0:02:41.124 --> 0:02:44.164
<v Speaker 2>we both have real jobs and then maybe you'll do

0:02:44.244 --> 0:02:46.684
<v Speaker 2>several hours of real work quote unquote, and then play

0:02:46.684 --> 0:02:49.644
<v Speaker 2>poker for twelve hours and then it's fine your two

0:02:49.684 --> 0:02:53.404
<v Speaker 2>am Mexican food hangout or something. But they are long days.

0:02:53.444 --> 0:02:55.324
<v Speaker 2>We do not get vacation when we're in Vegas.

0:02:55.364 --> 0:02:58.964
<v Speaker 3>Basically we do not. Right enough poker chat, let us

0:02:59.044 --> 0:03:03.884
<v Speaker 3>get into the virtual postbag. After we listened to the

0:03:03.884 --> 0:03:32.244
<v Speaker 3>theme music for Cautionary Tales. I am here with Nate

0:03:32.324 --> 0:03:35.964
<v Speaker 3>Silver and Maria Konikova, and here is a good question

0:03:36.044 --> 0:03:41.564
<v Speaker 3>to start with from listener Alex. Alex asks, have any

0:03:41.604 --> 0:03:47.404
<v Speaker 3>personal experiences or academic theories really shaped your decision making.

0:03:48.124 --> 0:03:50.324
<v Speaker 3>Let me put this one to Nate first, and I'd

0:03:50.364 --> 0:03:51.604
<v Speaker 3>love to hear what both of you think.

0:03:52.004 --> 0:03:55.564
<v Speaker 2>I would say, my experience with risk taking and decision

0:03:55.604 --> 0:03:58.764
<v Speaker 2>making is very hands on for the most part. Right

0:03:58.804 --> 0:04:02.004
<v Speaker 2>when I was a kid, we would play Fantasy Baseball

0:04:02.124 --> 0:04:05.164
<v Speaker 2>and have little NFL betting pools and things like that. Obviously,

0:04:05.204 --> 0:04:08.004
<v Speaker 2>poker there's good instructional material, but you know, most people

0:04:08.044 --> 0:04:10.804
<v Speaker 2>are ultimately kind of largely self taught, you know, in

0:04:10.844 --> 0:04:13.524
<v Speaker 2>my book On the Edge. Then game theory plays a

0:04:13.564 --> 0:04:15.964
<v Speaker 2>really large role, and game theory plays a very large

0:04:16.004 --> 0:04:18.644
<v Speaker 2>role in poker. There are not computer programs called solvers

0:04:18.684 --> 0:04:22.084
<v Speaker 2>that literally have solved the Nash equilibrium for poker. If

0:04:22.124 --> 0:04:24.804
<v Speaker 2>you've seen a beautiful mind. A lot of things in

0:04:24.844 --> 0:04:27.804
<v Speaker 2>life is like what's the game theory equilibrium of, Like

0:04:27.844 --> 0:04:30.764
<v Speaker 2>what traffic patterns look like in New York, or how

0:04:30.804 --> 0:04:33.324
<v Speaker 2>often you should eat one type of cuisine versus another,

0:04:33.404 --> 0:04:35.884
<v Speaker 2>or any type of competitive situation where there are lots

0:04:35.924 --> 0:04:38.524
<v Speaker 2>of optionality. I'd say game theory is kind of the

0:04:38.564 --> 0:04:40.124
<v Speaker 2>most important variable there.

0:04:41.044 --> 0:04:43.284
<v Speaker 3>And game theory, we should say, is really the use

0:04:43.324 --> 0:04:48.484
<v Speaker 3>of mathematical equations to model strategic into actions. So a

0:04:48.644 --> 0:04:52.284
<v Speaker 3>very simple example of game theory is the game of

0:04:52.404 --> 0:04:56.604
<v Speaker 3>rock paper scissors. Now, if I play rock, you're going

0:04:56.684 --> 0:04:58.804
<v Speaker 3>to play paper and beat me. If I play paper,

0:04:59.044 --> 0:05:01.164
<v Speaker 3>you're going to play scissors and beat me. And so

0:05:01.284 --> 0:05:04.044
<v Speaker 3>game theory says, oh, you have to randomize, you have

0:05:04.084 --> 0:05:07.284
<v Speaker 3>to have a one third chance of playing each strategy.

0:05:07.364 --> 0:05:09.804
<v Speaker 3>I mean, that's kind of obvious. Game theory can be

0:05:09.884 --> 0:05:14.484
<v Speaker 3>used to model much more complex situations, including famously, because

0:05:14.524 --> 0:05:17.764
<v Speaker 3>it inspired one of the creators of game theory poker.

0:05:18.164 --> 0:05:21.444
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, I would second Nate on game theory. It was

0:05:21.644 --> 0:05:25.124
<v Speaker 1>one of the pinnacles of my academic work. And I'd

0:05:25.124 --> 0:05:29.484
<v Speaker 1>also say the psychological theories of Danny Conneman have been

0:05:29.644 --> 0:05:32.844
<v Speaker 1>hugely influential in how I think about decision making. He

0:05:33.044 --> 0:05:37.844
<v Speaker 1>was an absolutely brilliant man who really unearthed a lot

0:05:37.884 --> 0:05:42.284
<v Speaker 1>of the ways that our brains misprocess. I don't think

0:05:42.324 --> 0:05:43.764
<v Speaker 1>that's a word, but I'm going to make it one

0:05:44.084 --> 0:05:49.684
<v Speaker 1>misprocess information and the biases and heuristics that we're up against.

0:05:49.764 --> 0:05:53.084
<v Speaker 1>And it's incredibly powerful because even if you know that

0:05:53.124 --> 0:05:56.324
<v Speaker 1>those biases and heuristics exist in theory, in practice, you

0:05:56.324 --> 0:05:59.164
<v Speaker 1>still exhibit them. Right, You have the game theory kind

0:05:59.164 --> 0:06:02.964
<v Speaker 1>of that mathematical side, and then the psychological side of

0:06:03.244 --> 0:06:06.764
<v Speaker 1>Cooman and Poker, in my mind, is the life experience

0:06:06.844 --> 0:06:09.964
<v Speaker 1>that has cemented these more than anything else else in

0:06:10.004 --> 0:06:13.804
<v Speaker 1>my brain and has made me internalize how this actually

0:06:13.884 --> 0:06:17.564
<v Speaker 1>works in reality and how you can try to decide

0:06:17.604 --> 0:06:20.084
<v Speaker 1>optimally and then take that from the poker table to

0:06:20.244 --> 0:06:23.804
<v Speaker 1>real life, because poker's an environment where you can really

0:06:23.844 --> 0:06:27.764
<v Speaker 1>sample thousands and thousands and thousands of decisions, sample correctly.

0:06:27.804 --> 0:06:30.644
<v Speaker 1>And as you know, Tim, that's incredibly important when it

0:06:30.684 --> 0:06:32.564
<v Speaker 1>comes to learning and trying to get a sense of

0:06:32.564 --> 0:06:35.964
<v Speaker 1>for probabilities and in real life, not the poker table,

0:06:36.204 --> 0:06:38.804
<v Speaker 1>we never sample correctly right. So that's where a lot

0:06:38.844 --> 0:06:40.964
<v Speaker 1>of these biases come from. So I think poker is

0:06:41.004 --> 0:06:44.164
<v Speaker 1>a very powerful teaching tool to help cement these theories

0:06:44.204 --> 0:06:45.164
<v Speaker 1>into practice.

0:06:45.924 --> 0:06:49.444
<v Speaker 3>Okay, I've got a great question from Drew loyal listeners

0:06:49.444 --> 0:06:51.644
<v Speaker 3>to caution me tales. Now, I'm a big fan of

0:06:52.204 --> 0:06:55.924
<v Speaker 3>board games, and Drew wants to know Maria and Nate

0:06:56.244 --> 0:06:58.644
<v Speaker 3>do you play board games. If you play board games,

0:06:58.684 --> 0:07:01.524
<v Speaker 3>do you bring a poker lens to the table or

0:07:01.604 --> 0:07:02.844
<v Speaker 3>is it a different vibe?

0:07:03.164 --> 0:07:08.204
<v Speaker 1>So I hate board cames. I do not play board games.

0:07:08.444 --> 0:07:11.244
<v Speaker 1>My sisters a little over six years older than I am,

0:07:11.364 --> 0:07:14.484
<v Speaker 1>and she always loved board games. They bored me. Haha.

0:07:14.524 --> 0:07:18.564
<v Speaker 1>They're just not interesting. And you know when someone brings out,

0:07:18.604 --> 0:07:21.924
<v Speaker 1>you know, sellers of Katan or anything like that, I'm like,

0:07:21.964 --> 0:07:24.324
<v Speaker 1>oh God, no, no, no, no, please to get to

0:07:24.404 --> 0:07:27.564
<v Speaker 1>ride as a favorite in my family and I just

0:07:27.644 --> 0:07:30.244
<v Speaker 1>want to die, you know, for me, if there's game night,

0:07:30.404 --> 0:07:33.204
<v Speaker 1>please let it be poker. Otherwise, please don't make me

0:07:33.244 --> 0:07:35.564
<v Speaker 1>play and let me read my book on the side

0:07:35.684 --> 0:07:37.324
<v Speaker 1>and cheer you on while you play.

0:07:37.724 --> 0:07:42.084
<v Speaker 2>Yeah. I mean, look, some of the games get quite advanced,

0:07:42.404 --> 0:07:44.964
<v Speaker 2>and so it's like, where do you go from a

0:07:45.004 --> 0:07:47.724
<v Speaker 2>game that takes ten hours to learn something that's kind

0:07:47.724 --> 0:07:50.684
<v Speaker 2>of a broken, overly simple game, Right, But like, yeah,

0:07:50.844 --> 0:07:53.284
<v Speaker 2>I like games because I'm very competitive.

0:07:53.364 --> 0:07:53.524
<v Speaker 1>Right.

0:07:53.604 --> 0:07:55.324
<v Speaker 2>If I'm playing, it's like, oh, people, we're like, don't

0:07:55.324 --> 0:07:58.724
<v Speaker 2>have that background in games or poker. Then I'm just

0:07:58.724 --> 0:08:01.164
<v Speaker 2>gonna be honest. I tend to I tend to figure

0:08:01.164 --> 0:08:04.324
<v Speaker 2>out the strategy pretty quick. And when you.

0:08:04.404 --> 0:08:07.964
<v Speaker 1>Crush them, you crush their souls and their dreams, and

0:08:08.044 --> 0:08:10.724
<v Speaker 1>they wish they'd never asked to play. Day to your

0:08:10.764 --> 0:08:13.484
<v Speaker 1>point about the complexity, there's a New Yorker cartoon that

0:08:13.524 --> 0:08:17.164
<v Speaker 1>I absolutely love and it's a group of people sitting

0:08:17.164 --> 0:08:19.724
<v Speaker 1>around a table and one of them is reading a

0:08:19.724 --> 0:08:22.804
<v Speaker 1>game instruction manual and the rest of them are all skeletons.

0:08:23.004 --> 0:08:24.924
<v Speaker 1>He says, and so those are the rules? Shall we

0:08:24.964 --> 0:08:25.844
<v Speaker 1>start playing?

0:08:26.884 --> 0:08:31.524
<v Speaker 3>I love it. I had the privilege of interviewing Klaus Toyber,

0:08:32.164 --> 0:08:35.604
<v Speaker 3>the creator of Settlers of Katan, and he said something

0:08:35.604 --> 0:08:38.724
<v Speaker 3>that really stuck with me, which I suspect will resonate

0:08:38.764 --> 0:08:41.444
<v Speaker 3>with you poker players. He said, you can know somebody

0:08:41.884 --> 0:08:45.964
<v Speaker 3>their whole lives and play a game with them and

0:08:46.004 --> 0:08:49.604
<v Speaker 3>you will see something that you've never seen that's wonderful.

0:08:49.644 --> 0:08:52.324
<v Speaker 1>And I actually that's how I feel about poker. Your

0:08:52.444 --> 0:08:54.644
<v Speaker 1>character comes out. And by the way, I do have

0:08:54.684 --> 0:08:57.204
<v Speaker 1>a very strong interest in games for my next book

0:08:57.204 --> 0:08:59.964
<v Speaker 1>when it comes to cheating, so I'm interested in, like,

0:09:00.404 --> 0:09:03.284
<v Speaker 1>what kind of a person you know cheats a monopoly

0:09:03.444 --> 0:09:04.084
<v Speaker 1>at home.

0:09:03.884 --> 0:09:05.324
<v Speaker 3>Game night, people who want to win.

0:09:05.724 --> 0:09:09.004
<v Speaker 1>It's just totally like mind boggling to me that you

0:09:09.044 --> 0:09:11.524
<v Speaker 1>would do that. But but there you have it.

0:09:11.644 --> 0:09:15.924
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, my partner is also very competitive, but his main

0:09:16.004 --> 0:09:20.124
<v Speaker 2>objective is making sure that I don't win, right, He

0:09:20.204 --> 0:09:25.604
<v Speaker 2>will go out, You'll go out of his way to

0:09:25.724 --> 0:09:29.444
<v Speaker 2>lose himself if it's a murder suicide mission basically, which

0:09:29.564 --> 0:09:30.884
<v Speaker 2>changes the strategy quite a bit.

0:09:31.204 --> 0:09:33.244
<v Speaker 3>I feel. See that's amazing.

0:09:33.764 --> 0:09:35.844
<v Speaker 2>So here's one for you, Tim. This question is from

0:09:36.564 --> 0:09:39.484
<v Speaker 2>Carrie k E r ri E. I know Irish or something, Carrie,

0:09:39.524 --> 0:09:42.164
<v Speaker 2>but anyway, Hi Tim and team. I worry that a

0:09:42.164 --> 0:09:44.764
<v Speaker 2>big problem with the productivity gap in the UK is

0:09:44.804 --> 0:09:48.244
<v Speaker 2>a lack of high quality data and data driven decision making.

0:09:48.764 --> 0:09:50.844
<v Speaker 2>I see a lot of investment in data that is

0:09:50.884 --> 0:09:53.884
<v Speaker 2>overseen by technical experts in a given domain, but very

0:09:53.924 --> 0:09:58.004
<v Speaker 2>little consultation of data scientists. Company and organizational boards also

0:09:58.004 --> 0:10:00.564
<v Speaker 2>seem to lack the sort of expertise which is often

0:10:00.644 --> 0:10:04.044
<v Speaker 2>rolled into a catch all it function. I work in

0:10:04.044 --> 0:10:06.924
<v Speaker 2>the public sector, and so I have framed my question accordingly.

0:10:07.364 --> 0:10:10.004
<v Speaker 2>Should we have a government department devoted to or is

0:10:10.044 --> 0:10:14.044
<v Speaker 2>it all a bit nineteen eighty four? Best wishes, Kirie.

0:10:14.724 --> 0:10:16.964
<v Speaker 3>Well, I love the question, and we do kind of

0:10:16.964 --> 0:10:19.764
<v Speaker 3>have a government department devoted to data. It's called the

0:10:19.804 --> 0:10:23.284
<v Speaker 3>Office for National Statistics, but it's focused on very old

0:10:23.324 --> 0:10:27.564
<v Speaker 3>school statistics rather than modern data science, and old school

0:10:27.604 --> 0:10:31.524
<v Speaker 3>statistics tends to focus on smaller data sets, very well behaved,

0:10:32.004 --> 0:10:34.724
<v Speaker 3>well formatted data sets. For example, you might go out

0:10:34.724 --> 0:10:37.804
<v Speaker 3>and do a survey rather than just say, hey, well,

0:10:37.804 --> 0:10:40.084
<v Speaker 3>we're going to just draw administrative data, or we're going

0:10:40.124 --> 0:10:42.724
<v Speaker 3>to look at data that's coming out of people's smartphones,

0:10:43.084 --> 0:10:45.004
<v Speaker 3>which you know, there's a lot more information in there,

0:10:45.004 --> 0:10:47.804
<v Speaker 3>but it's a lot messier, to be honest. What really

0:10:47.884 --> 0:10:53.724
<v Speaker 3>concerns me at the moment is that data is systematically

0:10:53.844 --> 0:10:57.684
<v Speaker 3>underrated by governments. I think they don't realize how powerful

0:10:57.724 --> 0:11:00.364
<v Speaker 3>it can be, that they don't realize how dangerous it

0:11:00.404 --> 0:11:04.484
<v Speaker 3>can be, and it tends to be given a low

0:11:04.604 --> 0:11:08.924
<v Speaker 3>political priority or misused. So at the moment in the US,

0:11:08.964 --> 0:11:11.124
<v Speaker 3>for example, we've got this sort of sudden disappearance of

0:11:11.164 --> 0:11:14.644
<v Speaker 3>all these government websites. It's unclear how much data has

0:11:14.684 --> 0:11:17.844
<v Speaker 3>permanently disappeared, or is it just that it's temporarily gone down.

0:11:18.004 --> 0:11:21.684
<v Speaker 3>Is somebody archiving it? Will the archives work or not?

0:11:21.924 --> 0:11:24.804
<v Speaker 3>Archives don't always work. Are we going to have interrupted

0:11:25.004 --> 0:11:28.164
<v Speaker 3>data sets? It's very unclear what's gone and what hasn't.

0:11:28.724 --> 0:11:32.004
<v Speaker 3>So that's a particularly extreme example, but generally, I'm working

0:11:32.004 --> 0:11:35.564
<v Speaker 3>on a history of data. At the moment. It's so powerful,

0:11:36.004 --> 0:11:40.164
<v Speaker 3>it's so important. It is the foundation of our health systems.

0:11:40.164 --> 0:11:42.924
<v Speaker 3>It's the foundation of many of our economic activities. It's

0:11:42.964 --> 0:11:46.004
<v Speaker 3>the foundation of science. It's also the foundation of some

0:11:46.124 --> 0:11:49.604
<v Speaker 3>terrible abuses of human rights in the past. And yet

0:11:49.724 --> 0:11:52.044
<v Speaker 3>it's kind of boring and it's kind of geeky, and

0:11:52.124 --> 0:11:55.244
<v Speaker 3>so it just gets overlooked, and that's what really worries me.

0:11:55.564 --> 0:11:57.924
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, I mean, it's interesting that you have, you know,

0:11:58.084 --> 0:12:01.524
<v Speaker 2>one partisan faction in the US that seems to think

0:12:01.564 --> 0:12:05.804
<v Speaker 2>that less data is better instead of having better data, right.

0:12:05.844 --> 0:12:08.604
<v Speaker 2>And some types of data you can go back and recollect,

0:12:08.724 --> 0:12:09.844
<v Speaker 2>but something as you can't.

0:12:09.924 --> 0:12:10.044
<v Speaker 3>Right.

0:12:10.044 --> 0:12:13.364
<v Speaker 2>The UK, for example, has a data set of economic

0:12:14.284 --> 0:12:17.444
<v Speaker 2>statistics like GDP that goes back like almost a thousand

0:12:17.524 --> 0:12:20.684
<v Speaker 2>years or something, right, because they were collecting records for

0:12:20.844 --> 0:12:24.244
<v Speaker 2>tax purposes and estate purposes and everything in real time.

0:12:24.364 --> 0:12:27.804
<v Speaker 3>Yeah. Well, we call the doom Doomsday Book eighty six.

0:12:27.844 --> 0:12:30.164
<v Speaker 3>I'm old enough to remember the nine hundredth anniversary of

0:12:30.244 --> 0:12:34.564
<v Speaker 3>the Doomsday Book. There's an interesting little caution retail there.

0:12:34.884 --> 0:12:37.564
<v Speaker 3>So for the nine hundredth anniversary of the Doomsday Book,

0:12:37.564 --> 0:12:40.804
<v Speaker 3>which was in nineteen eighty six, the BBC organized this

0:12:41.644 --> 0:12:44.364
<v Speaker 3>kind of a proto Wikipedia. They said, we're going to

0:12:44.644 --> 0:12:48.724
<v Speaker 3>encourage this project where school kids across the country are

0:12:48.724 --> 0:12:50.964
<v Speaker 3>going to act as citizen journalists. They're going to go around,

0:12:51.004 --> 0:12:53.964
<v Speaker 3>they'll interview people, they'll gather data, they'll write the little essays.

0:12:54.364 --> 0:12:57.324
<v Speaker 3>We've got maps, we'll have photographs, and we'll put it

0:12:57.364 --> 0:13:02.044
<v Speaker 3>all on a laser disc. Remember laser disc. You can

0:13:02.084 --> 0:13:05.124
<v Speaker 3>see the problem, right. And we've got these highly sophisticated,

0:13:05.484 --> 0:13:08.604
<v Speaker 3>expensive computer systems they're going to be accessible in every school.

0:13:08.724 --> 0:13:11.564
<v Speaker 3>And it was called Doomsday nineteen eighty six. I think

0:13:11.924 --> 0:13:14.044
<v Speaker 3>it was super cool. I remember it really well. And

0:13:14.084 --> 0:13:18.124
<v Speaker 3>then by about nineteen ninety eight, it was just impossible

0:13:18.124 --> 0:13:20.804
<v Speaker 3>to even read the laser discs. So this whole project

0:13:20.844 --> 0:13:23.764
<v Speaker 3>just went offline. Meanwhile, by the way, the original Doomsday

0:13:23.764 --> 0:13:27.284
<v Speaker 3>books from ten eighty six still available.

0:13:28.004 --> 0:13:32.724
<v Speaker 1>Paper has a certain appeal and has lasted four centuries

0:13:32.844 --> 0:13:36.644
<v Speaker 1>for a reason. You know, the flip side tim of

0:13:36.684 --> 0:13:38.764
<v Speaker 1>what you were saying about what's happening in the US

0:13:39.124 --> 0:13:42.764
<v Speaker 1>and kind to address the nineteen eighty four element of

0:13:42.804 --> 0:13:45.604
<v Speaker 1>the question is so, you know, yes, a lot of

0:13:45.684 --> 0:13:48.884
<v Speaker 1>data is disappearing, and then data that was never meant

0:13:48.964 --> 0:13:53.924
<v Speaker 1>to be aggregated and linked and personalized is being shared,

0:13:54.044 --> 0:13:57.524
<v Speaker 1>and profiles of people of US citizens and non citizens

0:13:57.564 --> 0:14:01.044
<v Speaker 1>are being created that should have never been created.

0:14:01.124 --> 0:14:01.244
<v Speaker 3>Right.

0:14:01.284 --> 0:14:04.364
<v Speaker 1>There were rules in place to keep those data sets

0:14:04.404 --> 0:14:07.524
<v Speaker 1>separate for a reason, for privacy protections, and now the

0:14:07.564 --> 0:14:12.924
<v Speaker 1>government is trying to roll back those rules and collect

0:14:13.084 --> 0:14:17.204
<v Speaker 1>and de anonymize the data that was shared by people

0:14:17.444 --> 0:14:20.684
<v Speaker 1>with the assumption that that would never happen. That's really bad, right,

0:14:20.804 --> 0:14:23.324
<v Speaker 1>So there's this kind of dystopian thing going on.

0:14:24.004 --> 0:14:26.724
<v Speaker 3>And there's history here. I mean, this has happened before.

0:14:26.764 --> 0:14:28.084
<v Speaker 3>This happened in the nineteen forties.

0:14:28.164 --> 0:14:31.244
<v Speaker 1>It's not good. Nineteen forties was not a good time

0:14:31.284 --> 0:14:33.044
<v Speaker 1>in history if people remember.

0:14:33.604 --> 0:14:35.364
<v Speaker 3>No, I think we can all agree on that one.

0:14:35.564 --> 0:14:37.884
<v Speaker 3>Thank you very much, Nate and Maria. We will be

0:14:37.964 --> 0:14:51.924
<v Speaker 3>answering more of your questions after this shortbreak. We are back.

0:14:52.324 --> 0:14:55.764
<v Speaker 3>I'm here with Nate Silver and Maria Konikova of Risky Business,

0:14:55.844 --> 0:14:58.644
<v Speaker 3>and we have an interesting question from a Risky Business

0:14:58.764 --> 0:15:03.124
<v Speaker 3>listener who asks, one thing that happened during the tariffs

0:15:03.124 --> 0:15:06.524
<v Speaker 3>which didn't get much attention, is the ten year treasury

0:15:06.604 --> 0:15:09.324
<v Speaker 3>rate spiked from four to four and a half percent.

0:15:10.204 --> 0:15:11.764
<v Speaker 3>I should say, by the way I work for the

0:15:11.844 --> 0:15:14.044
<v Speaker 3>Financial Times, we were paying a lot of attention to that,

0:15:14.124 --> 0:15:17.844
<v Speaker 3>but understand that outside geek land it was ignored. That

0:15:18.044 --> 0:15:21.524
<v Speaker 3>basically means, the listener continues, there is less belief that

0:15:21.804 --> 0:15:26.124
<v Speaker 3>US debt is a safe bet. It probably means somebody

0:15:26.404 --> 0:15:30.284
<v Speaker 3>cough China, cough, issued a cell order for a large

0:15:30.404 --> 0:15:33.884
<v Speaker 3>amount of US treasury with the intent to move the

0:15:34.004 --> 0:15:38.204
<v Speaker 3>interest rate as retaliation for tariffs. To cut to the

0:15:38.324 --> 0:15:42.244
<v Speaker 3>chase the listener asks, I would be extremely interested in

0:15:42.324 --> 0:15:46.124
<v Speaker 3>hearing what are your thoughts on the likelihood of the

0:15:46.244 --> 0:15:48.684
<v Speaker 3>United States defaulting? Nate?

0:15:48.764 --> 0:15:49.404
<v Speaker 1>This one's yere.

0:15:50.284 --> 0:15:52.924
<v Speaker 2>I used to know more about credit default swaps and

0:15:53.004 --> 0:15:55.524
<v Speaker 2>things like this. I mean, look, in the US runs

0:15:55.564 --> 0:15:58.204
<v Speaker 2>up very large deficits. Neither party has any interest in

0:15:59.444 --> 0:16:02.324
<v Speaker 2>doing what it would take to cut those deficits potentially. Right,

0:16:02.364 --> 0:16:04.284
<v Speaker 2>we got lucky in kind of the financial crisis in

0:16:04.324 --> 0:16:07.124
<v Speaker 2>COVID era of lower interest rates where you can borrow

0:16:07.244 --> 0:16:09.964
<v Speaker 2>very cheaply. It's no longer true now, In fact, borrow

0:16:10.004 --> 0:16:12.924
<v Speaker 2>he's getting more expensive. And so, you know, I trust

0:16:12.924 --> 0:16:16.084
<v Speaker 2>the market's fairly efficient here. But I guess the US

0:16:16.164 --> 0:16:17.724
<v Speaker 2>is still a bit too big to fail.

0:16:18.844 --> 0:16:21.284
<v Speaker 3>Well, normally, when we say too big to fail, we're

0:16:21.284 --> 0:16:23.924
<v Speaker 3>referring to things that the US is going to bail

0:16:24.004 --> 0:16:27.844
<v Speaker 3>out if necessary. Right, Yeah, the US is too big

0:16:27.884 --> 0:16:29.524
<v Speaker 3>to save. That's your problem.

0:16:29.844 --> 0:16:32.884
<v Speaker 2>You know. The world has profoundly been affected by Trump's

0:16:32.884 --> 0:16:35.244
<v Speaker 2>second term in a way it wasn't in Trump's first term.

0:16:35.444 --> 0:16:37.764
<v Speaker 2>Our neighbors to the north, Canada, had an election that

0:16:37.804 --> 0:16:40.964
<v Speaker 2>was entirely upended. The Liberals wound to back in power,

0:16:40.964 --> 0:16:43.004
<v Speaker 2>even though Trudeau had been very unpopular.

0:16:43.124 --> 0:16:43.284
<v Speaker 3>Right.

0:16:43.564 --> 0:16:45.844
<v Speaker 2>I would argue that the election of the new pope

0:16:46.324 --> 0:16:48.964
<v Speaker 2>was in part a response to Trump and the changing

0:16:49.004 --> 0:16:51.124
<v Speaker 2>geopolitical world, right, and say, Okay, we want to have

0:16:51.124 --> 0:16:53.764
<v Speaker 2>some influence on the United States. Have figure who's not Trump?

0:16:53.804 --> 0:16:56.604
<v Speaker 2>It can balance them out somehow, And so yeah, we're

0:16:56.964 --> 0:17:00.644
<v Speaker 2>way a different world. And I suppose I trust markets

0:17:00.684 --> 0:17:03.484
<v Speaker 2>and investors are intelligent about that. And I'm not sure

0:17:03.524 --> 0:17:06.244
<v Speaker 2>it's it's China so much as the fact that we're

0:17:06.244 --> 0:17:07.284
<v Speaker 2>in a new regime.

0:17:08.004 --> 0:17:10.684
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, I said in the agree, I think China needed

0:17:10.724 --> 0:17:13.564
<v Speaker 3>to do anything to make the US treasury rate spike.

0:17:13.724 --> 0:17:15.764
<v Speaker 3>When the rate spikes, by the way, it means people

0:17:15.804 --> 0:17:18.844
<v Speaker 3>are selling US government debt. When they sell it, the

0:17:18.844 --> 0:17:21.044
<v Speaker 3>price goes down, the interest rates goes up. But yeah,

0:17:21.084 --> 0:17:24.164
<v Speaker 3>plenty of people willing to do that without any coordinated

0:17:24.204 --> 0:17:27.364
<v Speaker 3>action from China. I mean, there is absolutely zero need

0:17:27.684 --> 0:17:30.204
<v Speaker 3>for the US government to default, because the US government

0:17:30.204 --> 0:17:32.684
<v Speaker 3>can always print more dollars. I mean, it could be

0:17:32.724 --> 0:17:35.364
<v Speaker 3>the US government debt gets less attractive, it could be

0:17:35.404 --> 0:17:37.364
<v Speaker 3>that inflation takes off, it could be there all kinds

0:17:37.364 --> 0:17:40.004
<v Speaker 3>of problems, but there's never a need to default. I

0:17:40.004 --> 0:17:42.084
<v Speaker 3>think the decision to default would be just that it

0:17:42.124 --> 0:17:44.804
<v Speaker 3>would be a decision the US government would have to

0:17:44.844 --> 0:17:48.444
<v Speaker 3>actively decide we want to stiff our creditors. So you

0:17:48.564 --> 0:17:50.884
<v Speaker 3>just have to look at the president and say, because

0:17:50.924 --> 0:17:53.044
<v Speaker 3>this looked like a man who stiffs his creditors, I

0:17:53.084 --> 0:17:56.244
<v Speaker 3>don't think. I don't think. So how long does sounds

0:17:56.324 --> 0:17:57.604
<v Speaker 3>like Donald J. Trump to me?

0:17:57.724 --> 0:18:01.164
<v Speaker 2>This is President Trump, which I candect him and the ft.

0:18:01.364 --> 0:18:04.724
<v Speaker 3>We have a new acronym. It's Taco. Taco stands for

0:18:04.804 --> 0:18:09.084
<v Speaker 3>Trump always chickens out. So the bet is that he

0:18:09.164 --> 0:18:12.604
<v Speaker 3>will not in fact default, even though he's talking about

0:18:12.684 --> 0:18:16.284
<v Speaker 3>various things that already looked like default, because the consequences

0:18:16.324 --> 0:18:19.164
<v Speaker 3>would be so catastrophic that he would look at the

0:18:19.204 --> 0:18:22.124
<v Speaker 3>consequences and he would back away. But that doesn't mean

0:18:22.324 --> 0:18:26.924
<v Speaker 3>that he couldn't do some damage. So fingers crossed, all right?

0:18:27.484 --> 0:18:32.244
<v Speaker 1>So listener Jack wants us to explore the thorny issue

0:18:32.284 --> 0:18:36.564
<v Speaker 1>of cell phones in school and writes Australia has been

0:18:36.644 --> 0:18:40.764
<v Speaker 1>running an experiment with New South Wales banning mobile phone

0:18:40.844 --> 0:18:44.804
<v Speaker 1>use in all schools from October twenty twenty three. This

0:18:44.964 --> 0:18:48.084
<v Speaker 1>is following the implementation of a ban in Victoria in

0:18:48.124 --> 0:18:53.924
<v Speaker 1>twenty twenty which itself cites research from England and other justifications.

0:18:54.364 --> 0:18:57.124
<v Speaker 1>So this listener has kids in school. This is not

0:18:57.164 --> 0:18:59.604
<v Speaker 1>where I thought the question was going to go. Actively

0:18:59.804 --> 0:19:05.404
<v Speaker 1>helps the fourteen year old subvert this ban, so they

0:19:05.444 --> 0:19:08.004
<v Speaker 1>have an old phone and a locked pouch and their

0:19:08.084 --> 0:19:10.844
<v Speaker 1>actual phone in their back. This is because they must

0:19:10.924 --> 0:19:13.524
<v Speaker 1>use their phone to hotspot the internet to their laptop.

0:19:14.404 --> 0:19:17.844
<v Speaker 1>Jack writes, My opinion is the whole thing as stupid,

0:19:17.884 --> 0:19:20.204
<v Speaker 1>as most kids have some kind of workaround and are

0:19:20.244 --> 0:19:23.364
<v Speaker 1>on their laptops all day. Anyway, if parents are on

0:19:23.404 --> 0:19:26.764
<v Speaker 1>their phones all the time, why are we expecting kids

0:19:26.804 --> 0:19:29.564
<v Speaker 1>not to be. I still see teachers in playgrounds face

0:19:29.604 --> 0:19:32.364
<v Speaker 1>and phone, and all the injustices and hypocrisy of my

0:19:32.404 --> 0:19:34.804
<v Speaker 1>own school days come flooding back. I mean, I know

0:19:34.844 --> 0:19:36.764
<v Speaker 1>I'm asking this question. I have so many thoughts, but

0:19:36.964 --> 0:19:38.724
<v Speaker 1>I'll open it up to you guests first.

0:19:40.164 --> 0:19:43.844
<v Speaker 3>I also have thoughts. I think the hypocrisy thought is real.

0:19:44.484 --> 0:19:47.324
<v Speaker 3>I have three children myself. My oldest child is twenty one,

0:19:47.404 --> 0:19:51.684
<v Speaker 3>the youngest is thirteen. They see me being distracted by

0:19:51.724 --> 0:19:54.484
<v Speaker 3>my phone all the time, and of course they're going

0:19:54.484 --> 0:19:57.124
<v Speaker 3>to be influenced by that. I think that this is

0:19:58.044 --> 0:20:01.644
<v Speaker 3>an evil device useful but evil that we all of

0:20:01.724 --> 0:20:05.244
<v Speaker 3>us need to fight together because it's capable of ruining

0:20:05.324 --> 0:20:08.204
<v Speaker 3>all of our lives. I feel like I should set

0:20:08.244 --> 0:20:11.524
<v Speaker 3>a good example, and I don't feel that the fact

0:20:11.604 --> 0:20:14.044
<v Speaker 3>that the grown ups are being distracted by the phones

0:20:14.484 --> 0:20:16.764
<v Speaker 3>is particularly a good reason to say the kids should

0:20:16.764 --> 0:20:18.964
<v Speaker 3>have the phones too. I mean, we would never say, hey,

0:20:19.004 --> 0:20:22.164
<v Speaker 3>I see the grown ups drinking vodka and smoking, so

0:20:22.444 --> 0:20:25.244
<v Speaker 3>why surely it's fine for the nine year olds to

0:20:25.284 --> 0:20:27.484
<v Speaker 3>also drink vodka and smoke. I mean, I don't think

0:20:27.484 --> 0:20:28.084
<v Speaker 3>that follows.

0:20:28.244 --> 0:20:29.364
<v Speaker 2>It's hypocritical term.

0:20:29.404 --> 0:20:32.084
<v Speaker 1>It's hypocritical that you do not like your child.

0:20:32.364 --> 0:20:36.284
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, well, I think it suggests that maybe the grown

0:20:36.324 --> 0:20:38.764
<v Speaker 3>up shouldn't bring so much vodka and shouldn't smoke so much,

0:20:39.124 --> 0:20:41.284
<v Speaker 3>rather than the other way around. But anyway, yeah, we

0:20:41.564 --> 0:20:43.324
<v Speaker 3>are setting an example, whether we like it or not.

0:20:43.564 --> 0:20:46.204
<v Speaker 1>I completely agree with that. And to add to it,

0:20:46.564 --> 0:20:51.164
<v Speaker 1>the use of screens in general, it's very different depending

0:20:51.244 --> 0:20:54.284
<v Speaker 1>on your age. There's emerging research, but now we have

0:20:54.684 --> 0:20:57.804
<v Speaker 1>a few decades worth of what phones do to developing

0:20:57.844 --> 0:21:00.884
<v Speaker 1>brains and kind of the habits that you create from

0:21:00.924 --> 0:21:02.964
<v Speaker 1>a young age. So being on the phone as an

0:21:02.964 --> 0:21:07.244
<v Speaker 1>adult who grew up without that kind of access is

0:21:07.444 --> 0:21:10.964
<v Speaker 1>very different from growing up and actually constantly being connected

0:21:10.964 --> 0:21:13.484
<v Speaker 1>to a scream. By the way, there's also research that

0:21:13.524 --> 0:21:16.484
<v Speaker 1>shows that taking notes by hand is much more powerful

0:21:16.524 --> 0:21:20.004
<v Speaker 1>than taking notes on a laptop. Right. You retain more information,

0:21:20.124 --> 0:21:23.804
<v Speaker 1>you learn better because there's a brain link between the

0:21:23.844 --> 0:21:26.684
<v Speaker 1>hand and the brain that does not exist when you're typing.

0:21:27.124 --> 0:21:29.084
<v Speaker 1>It would be better. I totally agree with you, Tim,

0:21:29.124 --> 0:21:31.844
<v Speaker 1>Adults should be on their phones much less than I

0:21:31.884 --> 0:21:35.484
<v Speaker 1>write about this. I think it's actually really great practice

0:21:35.644 --> 0:21:38.604
<v Speaker 1>to not have your phone. I've sometimes left my phone

0:21:38.644 --> 0:21:41.324
<v Speaker 1>at home on purpose to kind of have a day

0:21:41.724 --> 0:21:45.044
<v Speaker 1>without cell phones. I have programs that turn the Internet

0:21:45.084 --> 0:21:48.724
<v Speaker 1>off on my computer because I lack willpower if I don't,

0:21:48.764 --> 0:21:51.604
<v Speaker 1>forcibly kind of have it turned off to try to

0:21:51.644 --> 0:21:54.844
<v Speaker 1>have some deep concentration, deep writing time. This is all

0:21:54.924 --> 0:21:57.924
<v Speaker 1>kind of related to our executive function, our self controllability,

0:21:58.204 --> 0:22:00.844
<v Speaker 1>our ability to learn, our memory. All of these things

0:22:00.884 --> 0:22:04.524
<v Speaker 1>are interconnected. And don't you want your child to actually

0:22:04.604 --> 0:22:08.564
<v Speaker 1>emerge as a kind of smart adult who's capable of

0:22:08.644 --> 0:22:10.844
<v Speaker 1>all of these things as opposed to someone who is

0:22:11.164 --> 0:22:12.324
<v Speaker 1>constantly distracted.

0:22:13.044 --> 0:22:15.284
<v Speaker 3>Nate strikes me as the three screens that wants going

0:22:15.444 --> 0:22:15.964
<v Speaker 3>nate anything.

0:22:16.164 --> 0:22:17.884
<v Speaker 2>You know, I just have my laptops. If people think

0:22:17.884 --> 0:22:20.164
<v Speaker 2>I have some big, elaborate, minor setup, I just have

0:22:20.204 --> 0:22:24.964
<v Speaker 2>my little laptop. Actually, yeah, Look, is it paternalistic to

0:22:24.964 --> 0:22:27.564
<v Speaker 2>tell kids they can't use their phones? I mean, yeah,

0:22:27.564 --> 0:22:30.284
<v Speaker 2>but they're kids, right, so you're allowed, You're allowed to

0:22:30.284 --> 0:22:33.964
<v Speaker 2>be paternalistic toward them. And I don't know. I mean,

0:22:33.964 --> 0:22:36.244
<v Speaker 2>I guess the one caveat I have is I was

0:22:36.644 --> 0:22:41.404
<v Speaker 2>chronically pretty bored in school, right, and so I'm sympathetic

0:22:41.444 --> 0:22:43.284
<v Speaker 2>to the kids that are like, Okay, I'm bored. I'm

0:22:43.364 --> 0:22:45.964
<v Speaker 2>learning things I already know. But like, it is a

0:22:45.964 --> 0:22:48.204
<v Speaker 2>situation where I think you have to have some type

0:22:48.244 --> 0:22:52.084
<v Speaker 2>of consistent enforcement in the rules. But when you're in school,

0:22:52.324 --> 0:22:54.604
<v Speaker 2>blame your teachers not making you interested, but don't blame

0:22:54.604 --> 0:22:56.924
<v Speaker 2>them for not letting you be on Instagram while you're

0:22:56.924 --> 0:22:58.404
<v Speaker 2>supposed to be learning algebra.

0:22:59.204 --> 0:23:02.284
<v Speaker 3>I think it might also be a collective action problem. Yes,

0:23:02.444 --> 0:23:06.844
<v Speaker 3>I think it's perfectly possible that you've got teenagers who

0:23:06.924 --> 0:23:09.844
<v Speaker 3>would be quite happy if nobody in this pool had

0:23:09.844 --> 0:23:14.364
<v Speaker 3>Instagram or nobody had Snapchat. But if other people are

0:23:14.444 --> 0:23:18.044
<v Speaker 3>using Snapchat to communicate to arrange to meet up. Well,

0:23:18.044 --> 0:23:21.404
<v Speaker 3>then I need Snapchat too, and just talking to teenagers,

0:23:21.764 --> 0:23:25.204
<v Speaker 3>I think that viewpoint is not unusual. Some of them

0:23:25.204 --> 0:23:28.124
<v Speaker 3>are like, please, can you just ban everybody from using

0:23:28.124 --> 0:23:30.404
<v Speaker 3>it and then I'll be happy? Yeah, Okay, let's move

0:23:30.444 --> 0:23:33.404
<v Speaker 3>on because I I've got a question specifically from Maria

0:23:33.844 --> 0:23:38.124
<v Speaker 3>from a long, long time listener from Quebec. They would

0:23:38.244 --> 0:23:41.644
<v Speaker 3>like to hear Maria talk about a particular point of

0:23:41.684 --> 0:23:45.084
<v Speaker 3>her book, The Biggest Bluff, where she describes the breakfast

0:23:45.204 --> 0:23:47.804
<v Speaker 3>she had with her mentor. You were trying to find

0:23:47.844 --> 0:23:49.404
<v Speaker 3>somebody who would teach her to play poker so that

0:23:49.444 --> 0:23:51.244
<v Speaker 3>you could write a book about learning to play poker.

0:23:52.084 --> 0:23:55.004
<v Speaker 3>He only became interested when he realized you don't know

0:23:55.164 --> 0:23:57.444
<v Speaker 3>anything at all about the subject. You don't even know

0:23:57.484 --> 0:24:00.324
<v Speaker 3>how a deck of cards works. And our listener says,

0:24:00.444 --> 0:24:02.884
<v Speaker 3>I'm sixty five years old and I went through a

0:24:02.924 --> 0:24:05.564
<v Speaker 3>couple of career changes and I find this story very

0:24:05.604 --> 0:24:08.764
<v Speaker 3>moving and so true about what it means to learn

0:24:08.804 --> 0:24:11.924
<v Speaker 3>something and to teach something. So what are your thoughts

0:24:11.924 --> 0:24:12.124
<v Speaker 3>on that?

0:24:12.684 --> 0:24:13.484
<v Speaker 1>Yeah?

0:24:13.524 --> 0:24:14.204
<v Speaker 3>I think so.

0:24:14.844 --> 0:24:17.604
<v Speaker 1>This conversation took place the first time I ever met

0:24:18.004 --> 0:24:21.644
<v Speaker 1>Eric Sidell, who is a legend of the poker world,

0:24:22.004 --> 0:24:24.284
<v Speaker 1>and he had never taken on a poker student before.

0:24:24.404 --> 0:24:26.484
<v Speaker 1>And what stood out about me was that I was

0:24:26.524 --> 0:24:29.484
<v Speaker 1>a complete blank slate. I didn't have any bad habits.

0:24:29.604 --> 0:24:31.964
<v Speaker 1>I didn't have any habits, right, I didn't know anything.

0:24:32.324 --> 0:24:34.924
<v Speaker 1>And so for him, I think it was a very

0:24:34.964 --> 0:24:37.884
<v Speaker 1>interesting experiment, just like for me, it was an interesting

0:24:37.924 --> 0:24:40.884
<v Speaker 1>experiment from scratch. You know, what can he do with

0:24:40.964 --> 0:24:45.124
<v Speaker 1>me given my background in psychology in a short period

0:24:45.204 --> 0:24:47.764
<v Speaker 1>of time these days, when you know I've got all

0:24:47.764 --> 0:24:51.204
<v Speaker 1>these math wizards and selvers and all of these things,

0:24:51.844 --> 0:24:55.604
<v Speaker 1>is kind of psychology hard work. And if my background

0:24:55.684 --> 0:24:59.204
<v Speaker 1>isn't enough, right, could I do well? And so if

0:24:59.244 --> 0:25:01.404
<v Speaker 1>I could, that would be an amazing, hittive proof of

0:25:01.444 --> 0:25:04.164
<v Speaker 1>concept for the way that he thinks about the game.

0:25:04.484 --> 0:25:06.684
<v Speaker 1>And so I think to him, that's what made this

0:25:06.804 --> 0:25:08.684
<v Speaker 1>interesting and that's what made it appealing.

0:25:09.404 --> 0:25:13.484
<v Speaker 3>And why is Maria so good at poker? Is it

0:25:13.524 --> 0:25:17.364
<v Speaker 3>the coach? Is it her training as a psychologist? Is

0:25:17.404 --> 0:25:18.204
<v Speaker 3>it something else?

0:25:18.804 --> 0:25:21.844
<v Speaker 2>I think it's her and not the coaching, although Maria

0:25:22.604 --> 0:25:25.244
<v Speaker 2>is a wonderfully well connected person who has access to

0:25:26.004 --> 0:25:27.804
<v Speaker 2>some of the best poker minds in the world. But yeah, look,

0:25:27.884 --> 0:25:29.844
<v Speaker 2>it's the balance of the people reading skills and the

0:25:29.884 --> 0:25:34.524
<v Speaker 2>mathematical skills and the discipline. Really, you know, it's rare

0:25:34.644 --> 0:25:38.164
<v Speaker 2>to see Maria tilt. I'm sure she does it right,

0:25:38.164 --> 0:25:39.844
<v Speaker 2>but I think she is playing more than I am.

0:25:39.884 --> 0:25:43.084
<v Speaker 3>Frankly, Tilting is basically where you get emotional and it

0:25:43.084 --> 0:25:44.244
<v Speaker 3>affects your decisions.

0:25:44.364 --> 0:25:46.604
<v Speaker 2>Tilt doesn't have to be anger, right. It can be like, oh,

0:25:46.684 --> 0:25:49.004
<v Speaker 2>I've had a great day, so I'm gonna not fight

0:25:49.044 --> 0:25:50.924
<v Speaker 2>for this pot that you're supposed to bluff for a thing.

0:25:51.004 --> 0:25:52.924
<v Speaker 2>It can be a lot of different formats of it.

0:25:52.964 --> 0:25:55.084
<v Speaker 2>But like you know, we know one always plays their

0:25:55.084 --> 0:25:57.204
<v Speaker 2>A game, right. But if you're always playing your B

0:25:57.284 --> 0:26:00.244
<v Speaker 2>plus game or better, and you're really smart in lots

0:26:00.244 --> 0:26:02.604
<v Speaker 2>of different ways and read people well and maybe defy

0:26:02.684 --> 0:26:05.604
<v Speaker 2>stereotypes a little bit too, maybe are more aggressive than

0:26:05.604 --> 0:26:08.564
<v Speaker 2>people are expecting. So yeah, I would say she's a

0:26:08.564 --> 0:26:11.324
<v Speaker 2>well rounded poker player. By the way, It's part of

0:26:11.364 --> 0:26:14.684
<v Speaker 2>like learning the game later is that you might wind

0:26:14.764 --> 0:26:17.524
<v Speaker 2>up being a little bit more well rounded. When I

0:26:17.604 --> 0:26:20.404
<v Speaker 2>used to play for a living back god twenty years ago,

0:26:20.404 --> 0:26:22.364
<v Speaker 2>now I'm getting old. I played a game called limit

0:26:22.404 --> 0:26:25.324
<v Speaker 2>Hold Them, which the same amount as bet on every

0:26:25.524 --> 0:26:27.804
<v Speaker 2>hand or as a no limit you can be anywhere

0:26:27.804 --> 0:26:31.324
<v Speaker 2>from one chip to the entire size of your stack,

0:26:31.404 --> 0:26:33.124
<v Speaker 2>and it's a much different game. And so I had

0:26:33.164 --> 0:26:36.004
<v Speaker 2>to spend a lot of time unlearning habits from limit

0:26:36.004 --> 0:26:38.564
<v Speaker 2>hold them, which can be bad habits in no limit holding.

0:26:39.364 --> 0:26:41.764
<v Speaker 3>We've got more questions coming up, but first let's take

0:26:41.764 --> 0:26:56.124
<v Speaker 3>a quick break. Welcome back to caution me questions with me,

0:26:56.324 --> 0:26:57.324
<v Speaker 3>Tim Harford.

0:26:57.124 --> 0:26:59.644
<v Speaker 1>And me Maria Kannakova and me, Mate Silver.

0:27:00.684 --> 0:27:05.204
<v Speaker 2>So here's a question from Mark. Mark asks, it's no

0:27:05.324 --> 0:27:08.964
<v Speaker 2>secret that political donations are tied to political favors, legislation

0:27:09.004 --> 0:27:12.444
<v Speaker 2>benefiting the highest owners, and so forth. If the politicians

0:27:12.444 --> 0:27:14.564
<v Speaker 2>are the machine, and the machine runs on money, what

0:27:14.644 --> 0:27:17.044
<v Speaker 2>if we tweaked the source of the money. What would

0:27:17.044 --> 0:27:20.404
<v Speaker 2>happen if, by some stroke of magic, Congress received vastly

0:27:20.564 --> 0:27:24.284
<v Speaker 2>larger salaries, increasing with years of service. But with one

0:27:24.324 --> 0:27:28.804
<v Speaker 2>big caveat, politicians cannot accept any donations, gifts, speaking, fees,

0:27:28.924 --> 0:27:32.244
<v Speaker 2>or favors in any form other than direct money donations

0:27:32.284 --> 0:27:35.844
<v Speaker 2>from constituents up to the federal limits without forfeiting their

0:27:35.844 --> 0:27:40.204
<v Speaker 2>public service salary. So put, simply, what if public service

0:27:40.284 --> 0:27:44.044
<v Speaker 2>was a bigger, more valuable incentive. Could it even outcompete

0:27:44.044 --> 0:27:47.564
<v Speaker 2>the current incentives? Would governing change for the better or

0:27:47.604 --> 0:27:50.324
<v Speaker 2>for the worse? And why I like it?

0:27:50.764 --> 0:27:53.844
<v Speaker 1>You know, it's a good question, but it's slightly naive

0:27:53.884 --> 0:27:57.924
<v Speaker 1>in the sense that we already have rules against politicians

0:27:58.044 --> 0:28:01.724
<v Speaker 1>accepting all sorts of things that Mark wants them not

0:28:01.804 --> 0:28:04.244
<v Speaker 1>to accept. And there are ways around them, right There

0:28:04.284 --> 0:28:09.124
<v Speaker 1>are packs which are political action committees which you can donate,

0:28:09.724 --> 0:28:14.124
<v Speaker 1>There's ways that you can lobby and influence people. People

0:28:14.164 --> 0:28:17.924
<v Speaker 1>would get around these incentives very easily, just like they

0:28:17.924 --> 0:28:18.484
<v Speaker 1>do today.

0:28:18.604 --> 0:28:20.924
<v Speaker 3>This maybe is a naive observation, but I would have

0:28:21.044 --> 0:28:25.364
<v Speaker 3>thought there was a difference between donations to a campaign

0:28:25.724 --> 0:28:28.724
<v Speaker 3>for the purposes of spending money on adverts to get

0:28:28.804 --> 0:28:32.764
<v Speaker 3>re elected, versus just donations to a politician's bank account.

0:28:32.884 --> 0:28:34.324
<v Speaker 3>There should be a bright line between the two of them.

0:28:34.364 --> 0:28:35.724
<v Speaker 3>I mean, ate, you're the experts on this.

0:28:36.004 --> 0:28:38.124
<v Speaker 2>The answers. You are supposed to report to the Federal

0:28:38.124 --> 0:28:41.564
<v Speaker 2>Election Commission every dollar that you spend, so you definitely

0:28:41.604 --> 0:28:45.884
<v Speaker 2>run a risk of expenses being scrutinized if they're not legitimate.

0:28:45.964 --> 0:28:48.124
<v Speaker 2>But of course there are a million things a tranch

0:28:48.164 --> 0:28:52.684
<v Speaker 2>of expenses that are ambiguous between personal and business expenses. Right,

0:28:52.924 --> 0:28:55.964
<v Speaker 2>you can also shuffle money to consultants and pay them

0:28:56.004 --> 0:28:58.524
<v Speaker 2>maybe more than their worth, in exchange for who knows

0:28:58.964 --> 0:29:01.484
<v Speaker 2>favors later on and so forth. I think it's probably

0:29:01.484 --> 0:29:04.204
<v Speaker 2>a good idea to pay members of Congress more. I

0:29:04.244 --> 0:29:06.484
<v Speaker 2>think it might help recruit some people who are not

0:29:06.644 --> 0:29:09.604
<v Speaker 2>already wealthy to enter Congress. I think in general, well

0:29:09.964 --> 0:29:13.644
<v Speaker 2>tap performing government employees should be paid more too, and

0:29:13.684 --> 0:29:15.524
<v Speaker 2>make it is you're made to fire the poor performers.

0:29:15.764 --> 0:29:17.524
<v Speaker 2>I don't I don't understand when we want to go

0:29:17.524 --> 0:29:19.484
<v Speaker 2>into politics. It sounds like miserable to me to be

0:29:19.484 --> 0:29:23.364
<v Speaker 2>a member of Higuras. My lizard brain can't crack those incentives.

0:29:23.444 --> 0:29:30.284
<v Speaker 3>Necessarily, it is worth directing some attention to politicians' latitude

0:29:30.724 --> 0:29:33.284
<v Speaker 3>to do things that people might want to bribe them

0:29:33.444 --> 0:29:36.924
<v Speaker 3>to do. So, the more personal discretion a politician has,

0:29:37.404 --> 0:29:40.524
<v Speaker 3>the more it's worth bribing them. So one of the

0:29:40.884 --> 0:29:46.204
<v Speaker 3>interesting things about tariffs is that if you put a

0:29:46.444 --> 0:29:50.804
<v Speaker 3>large tariff on importers, it's then worth a great deal

0:29:50.844 --> 0:29:54.284
<v Speaker 3>of money to particular importers to be exempt from that tariff.

0:29:54.404 --> 0:29:56.164
<v Speaker 3>I mean, it keeps changing, but there was this huge

0:29:56.204 --> 0:30:00.804
<v Speaker 3>tariff on electronic goods coming from China, and then it's like, oh, actually,

0:30:00.884 --> 0:30:03.244
<v Speaker 3>you know, we're not going to levy that on iPhones.

0:30:03.524 --> 0:30:06.804
<v Speaker 3>So Apple benefits from that. And I'm not saying, oh,

0:30:06.844 --> 0:30:10.324
<v Speaker 3>Apple bribed the president. I don't particular reasons to believe

0:30:10.324 --> 0:30:13.084
<v Speaker 3>they did. But the point is that when you've got

0:30:13.084 --> 0:30:16.804
<v Speaker 3>that sort of personal discression, it becomes hugely valuable, and

0:30:16.804 --> 0:30:18.924
<v Speaker 3>those interest groups are willing to pay a lot of money,

0:30:18.964 --> 0:30:21.084
<v Speaker 3>and so there's the temptation for bribery.

0:30:21.764 --> 0:30:24.644
<v Speaker 1>One of the big differences between first world and third

0:30:24.644 --> 0:30:29.044
<v Speaker 1>world countries is how prevalent bribery is kind of in

0:30:29.524 --> 0:30:32.524
<v Speaker 1>the way that governments function, and yet a lot of

0:30:32.564 --> 0:30:35.964
<v Speaker 1>so called first world countries and second World countries there's

0:30:36.044 --> 0:30:39.284
<v Speaker 1>a lot of bribing and corruption and cheating that goes

0:30:39.324 --> 0:30:42.804
<v Speaker 1>on no matter what. So sure, it would be amazing

0:30:42.884 --> 0:30:46.364
<v Speaker 1>if somehow we could create the an incentive structure where

0:30:46.444 --> 0:30:51.764
<v Speaker 1>that doesn't happen. But I don't see from a psychological standpoint,

0:30:52.164 --> 0:30:55.164
<v Speaker 1>how the same type of personality that wants to become

0:30:55.204 --> 0:30:58.844
<v Speaker 1>a politician and who's successful as a politician, who kind

0:30:58.844 --> 0:31:00.844
<v Speaker 1>of wheels and deals as a part of what they

0:31:00.844 --> 0:31:04.484
<v Speaker 1>did to get there, how they would ever be totally

0:31:04.524 --> 0:31:08.764
<v Speaker 1>above everything and rise to the heights of government needed

0:31:08.844 --> 0:31:11.524
<v Speaker 1>to excert real influence. It's a very cynical tick, but

0:31:11.564 --> 0:31:12.364
<v Speaker 1>that's how I see it.

0:31:13.204 --> 0:31:16.604
<v Speaker 3>Maria, you mentioned developing countries. This was perceived as being

0:31:16.644 --> 0:31:21.644
<v Speaker 3>a particular problem in Africa, both for historical reasons and

0:31:21.724 --> 0:31:24.204
<v Speaker 3>because a lot of Sub Saharan African countries are very,

0:31:24.324 --> 0:31:28.804
<v Speaker 3>very poor. And so this amazing African entrepreneur called mo Ibrahim,

0:31:29.204 --> 0:31:31.644
<v Speaker 3>who made a huge amount of money in telecommunications in

0:31:31.644 --> 0:31:35.844
<v Speaker 3>the nineteen nineties, became a billionaire. He announced the mo

0:31:36.004 --> 0:31:38.844
<v Speaker 3>Ibrahim Prize he was going to give. It was millions

0:31:39.084 --> 0:31:44.404
<v Speaker 3>to any African leader who surrendered power after losing a

0:31:44.404 --> 0:31:47.804
<v Speaker 3>democratic election. This is about twenty years ago. I was

0:31:47.964 --> 0:31:50.484
<v Speaker 3>googling around. I think the prize has been paid at

0:31:50.524 --> 0:31:53.364
<v Speaker 3>least once, but I haven't been able to find any

0:31:53.404 --> 0:31:55.404
<v Speaker 3>survey of whether it's made a difference. But I just

0:31:55.404 --> 0:31:57.524
<v Speaker 3>think it's a clever idea. Whether or not it worked

0:31:57.524 --> 0:31:58.964
<v Speaker 3>in practice, it's a clever idea.

0:31:59.684 --> 0:32:04.484
<v Speaker 2>Didn't Sam Bankman Freed want to pay your bribe Donald Trump,

0:32:04.524 --> 0:32:06.804
<v Speaker 2>like a billion dollars not to run for reelection or

0:32:06.844 --> 0:32:07.324
<v Speaker 2>something like.

0:32:07.284 --> 0:32:09.844
<v Speaker 3>That, just because Sam Bankmanfreed wanted to do it. It

0:32:09.884 --> 0:32:11.324
<v Speaker 3>doesn't mean it's a bad idea of it.

0:32:11.604 --> 0:32:13.524
<v Speaker 2>Might it might color my priors.

0:32:13.124 --> 0:32:13.604
<v Speaker 3>A little bit.

0:32:13.644 --> 0:32:18.764
<v Speaker 1>I'd say fair fair Sometimes you know a broken clock

0:32:18.844 --> 0:32:23.884
<v Speaker 1>is right twice a day. Let's take another question now

0:32:24.044 --> 0:32:28.084
<v Speaker 1>from Jordan, and this one was directed to you, Tim.

0:32:28.724 --> 0:32:32.444
<v Speaker 1>So first, Jordan loves your podcast and has listened to

0:32:32.764 --> 0:32:35.844
<v Speaker 1>every episode you've put out. Good to hear, so keep

0:32:35.924 --> 0:32:37.604
<v Speaker 1>up the great work and thank you. Jordan is a

0:32:37.644 --> 0:32:40.564
<v Speaker 1>dedicated phantom. It's a lot of episodes it I like it.

0:32:40.644 --> 0:32:42.684
<v Speaker 1>I love your podcast too, but I've missed some. I

0:32:42.724 --> 0:32:43.444
<v Speaker 1>have to admit.

0:32:43.964 --> 0:32:46.844
<v Speaker 3>They're all available on cat shop. So what is Jordan's question?

0:32:47.484 --> 0:32:52.124
<v Speaker 1>Yes, it's about penalty kicks, so if you don't move,

0:32:52.164 --> 0:32:54.524
<v Speaker 1>you're more likely to save them. I wonder about that,

0:32:54.604 --> 0:32:57.804
<v Speaker 1>since if a goalie never moves, then wouldn't the kicker

0:32:57.924 --> 0:33:01.404
<v Speaker 1>behave differently and make it easier to save shots that

0:33:01.524 --> 0:33:04.124
<v Speaker 1>don't go down the middle. I was just thinking about

0:33:04.124 --> 0:33:05.804
<v Speaker 1>it and was wondering how that was controlled for.

0:33:06.364 --> 0:33:08.964
<v Speaker 3>Actually, you two are the perfect people to answer this

0:33:09.044 --> 0:33:12.844
<v Speaker 3>question because it's about game theory, optimality and trying to

0:33:12.884 --> 0:33:17.324
<v Speaker 3>exploit suboptimal behavior in a soccer penalty. Basically, You've just

0:33:17.364 --> 0:33:20.684
<v Speaker 3>got a striker trying to score a goal. You've got

0:33:20.684 --> 0:33:23.844
<v Speaker 3>the goalkeeper standing there, and they can kind of guess.

0:33:23.884 --> 0:33:25.644
<v Speaker 3>They can dive to the left, or they can dive

0:33:25.684 --> 0:33:28.084
<v Speaker 3>to the right, and that's really a fifty to fifty

0:33:28.084 --> 0:33:30.444
<v Speaker 3>they'll guess right, or they could just kind of not

0:33:30.564 --> 0:33:32.884
<v Speaker 3>dive at all and stand in the middle, which makes

0:33:32.884 --> 0:33:36.004
<v Speaker 3>them look passive and like they're not even trying. However,

0:33:36.724 --> 0:33:39.404
<v Speaker 3>it turns out that because goalkeepers don't stand in the

0:33:39.404 --> 0:33:42.844
<v Speaker 3>middle because it makes them look passive, some strikers have

0:33:42.884 --> 0:33:45.004
<v Speaker 3>figured out, oh, if I just boot the ball straight

0:33:45.004 --> 0:33:47.684
<v Speaker 3>at the goalkeeper, they are guaranteed to dive to the

0:33:47.764 --> 0:33:49.924
<v Speaker 3>left or right, and I'm going to kick where they

0:33:49.964 --> 0:33:53.764
<v Speaker 3>were anyways. So Jordan's question is, well, hang on, if

0:33:53.804 --> 0:33:56.484
<v Speaker 3>the strikers figured that out, aren't the goalkeepers also going

0:33:56.524 --> 0:33:58.164
<v Speaker 3>to figure it out? So it's really a question of

0:33:58.164 --> 0:34:01.724
<v Speaker 3>people adapting to each other's strategy and the optimal mix

0:34:01.764 --> 0:34:05.404
<v Speaker 3>of strategies, and who better than you two to explain

0:34:05.404 --> 0:34:06.124
<v Speaker 3>the details here.

0:34:06.324 --> 0:34:09.244
<v Speaker 1>I mean, that is such a fascinating element of game

0:34:09.724 --> 0:34:12.524
<v Speaker 1>that Nate and I talk about quite often, which is

0:34:12.564 --> 0:34:15.964
<v Speaker 1>kind of this recursive element of it. Right, If I

0:34:16.004 --> 0:34:18.004
<v Speaker 1>know that you know that I know that you know.

0:34:18.844 --> 0:34:22.124
<v Speaker 1>And in poker this happens all the time, where you're

0:34:22.124 --> 0:34:24.884
<v Speaker 1>trying to figure out, you know, how do I adjust

0:34:24.924 --> 0:34:28.964
<v Speaker 1>to my opponent. If we're both playing GTO game theory

0:34:29.124 --> 0:34:33.364
<v Speaker 1>optimal poker, then technically, you know, we're we're both executing

0:34:33.364 --> 0:34:37.924
<v Speaker 1>a strategy perfectly. But humans aren't computers and that doesn't happen, right.

0:34:38.004 --> 0:34:40.644
<v Speaker 1>So if I figure out, for instance, that Nate is

0:34:40.764 --> 0:34:45.084
<v Speaker 1>calling too often, then I should start, you know, changing

0:34:45.164 --> 0:34:48.364
<v Speaker 1>my strategy away from GTO. So even if in this

0:34:48.404 --> 0:34:53.284
<v Speaker 1>particular spot, game theory says that I should check because

0:34:53.324 --> 0:34:56.204
<v Speaker 1>my hand is a little too weak to bet for value,

0:34:56.244 --> 0:34:58.564
<v Speaker 1>I bet again because I know that Nate is gonna

0:34:58.564 --> 0:35:02.084
<v Speaker 1>call me again with a worse hand because he overcalls, right,

0:35:02.324 --> 0:35:04.844
<v Speaker 1>So I'm kind of adapting to his behavior.

0:35:05.004 --> 0:35:05.124
<v Speaker 3>Now.

0:35:05.204 --> 0:35:07.004
<v Speaker 1>Nate is a smart guy who also knows a lot

0:35:07.044 --> 0:35:10.284
<v Speaker 1>about game theory. So what if Nate and figures out

0:35:10.484 --> 0:35:12.644
<v Speaker 1>that I'm doing this right, Because we get to show

0:35:12.684 --> 0:35:15.044
<v Speaker 1>down and he's like, Maria, how did you bet three

0:35:15.044 --> 0:35:18.204
<v Speaker 1>times with you know, bottom pair? This is crazy? You

0:35:18.284 --> 0:35:22.004
<v Speaker 1>were right, you won. But Nate figures out that, oh,

0:35:22.204 --> 0:35:26.004
<v Speaker 1>I'm overcalling, So now she's actually playing differently, So now

0:35:26.084 --> 0:35:29.004
<v Speaker 1>I'm going to change my strategy to adjust to that.

0:35:29.324 --> 0:35:31.564
<v Speaker 1>So next time I actually try to do that, Nate

0:35:31.684 --> 0:35:35.524
<v Speaker 1>ends up having just the nuts right, the best hand ever.

0:35:35.764 --> 0:35:37.764
<v Speaker 1>And when I have a good hand, you know, he

0:35:37.844 --> 0:35:41.364
<v Speaker 1>folds right. So he's now adjusted, and I say, oh wait, wait, wait, okay,

0:35:41.404 --> 0:35:44.484
<v Speaker 1>he's changed, so now I need to change. And with

0:35:44.564 --> 0:35:49.124
<v Speaker 1>two good players, this process can can go on indefinitely,

0:35:49.524 --> 0:35:52.764
<v Speaker 1>and sometimes you psych yourself out right and you start

0:35:52.844 --> 0:35:55.404
<v Speaker 1>getting into mind games, and sometimes you end up overthinking

0:35:55.404 --> 0:35:58.804
<v Speaker 1>and just making the wrong decision. Also, you're making assumptions

0:35:58.844 --> 0:36:01.084
<v Speaker 1>about the other person, right, and how the other person

0:36:01.124 --> 0:36:03.044
<v Speaker 1>is seeing you and how they're adjusting. Now I'm talking

0:36:03.084 --> 0:36:05.364
<v Speaker 1>about poker, because I know poker and I don't know soccer.

0:36:05.644 --> 0:36:08.524
<v Speaker 1>But this is exactly kind of the problem that you

0:36:08.644 --> 0:36:10.964
<v Speaker 1>have in this saga question.

0:36:11.364 --> 0:36:14.844
<v Speaker 3>In theoretical terms, as an academic would analyze it, you

0:36:14.884 --> 0:36:18.484
<v Speaker 3>get to an equilibrium, and the equilibrium is a mixed

0:36:18.484 --> 0:36:23.124
<v Speaker 3>strategy where it's unpredictable. So for example, the striker might

0:36:23.804 --> 0:36:26.044
<v Speaker 3>go left forty five percent of the time, go right

0:36:26.124 --> 0:36:28.044
<v Speaker 3>forty five percent of the time, stick it down the

0:36:28.084 --> 0:36:31.644
<v Speaker 3>middle ten percent of the time. And the goalkeeper might

0:36:31.884 --> 0:36:33.484
<v Speaker 3>stay in the middle twenty percent of the time and

0:36:33.524 --> 0:36:36.164
<v Speaker 3>go left forty percent and go right forty percent. But

0:36:36.204 --> 0:36:39.244
<v Speaker 3>the point is they can't be predictable. If they were predictable,

0:36:39.244 --> 0:36:42.724
<v Speaker 3>that could be exploitable, and they can't just be unpredictable

0:36:42.764 --> 0:36:45.044
<v Speaker 3>in a foolish way. So it's like, oh, I could

0:36:45.084 --> 0:36:48.124
<v Speaker 3>dive to the right fifty percent and to the left

0:36:48.124 --> 0:36:50.084
<v Speaker 3>fifty percent and never stand up in the middle. Well,

0:36:50.084 --> 0:36:52.964
<v Speaker 3>that's unpredictable, but it's also not smart because actually I

0:36:52.964 --> 0:36:56.244
<v Speaker 3>need to keep the striker honest and sometimes stand up. Absolutely,

0:36:56.404 --> 0:37:00.124
<v Speaker 3>there's always an equilibrium, but that equilibrium will involve a

0:37:00.204 --> 0:37:02.084
<v Speaker 3>randomized mixture of strategy, right.

0:37:02.164 --> 0:37:05.284
<v Speaker 1>But in practice, so this is called randomization. Right, The

0:37:05.564 --> 0:37:09.204
<v Speaker 1>human brain is very bad at randomizing randomly. Most humans

0:37:09.244 --> 0:37:11.564
<v Speaker 1>will end up having a pattern and will end up

0:37:11.604 --> 0:37:15.244
<v Speaker 1>actually doing one thing more than they're supposed to doing

0:37:15.284 --> 0:37:17.484
<v Speaker 1>another thing less than they're supposed to, because they're not

0:37:17.964 --> 0:37:19.884
<v Speaker 1>optimal game theoreticians.

0:37:20.164 --> 0:37:23.004
<v Speaker 3>There was actually a recent example where the English keeper

0:37:23.084 --> 0:37:28.004
<v Speaker 3>Jordan Pickford, in a high stakes penalty shootout, had a

0:37:28.164 --> 0:37:31.804
<v Speaker 3>water bottle with a list of every player on the

0:37:31.804 --> 0:37:34.724
<v Speaker 3>opposing team and whether he should dive to the left

0:37:34.804 --> 0:37:36.884
<v Speaker 3>or to the right, or stand up for that player,

0:37:37.084 --> 0:37:41.524
<v Speaker 3>So they had previously analyzed the play. His coaches had

0:37:41.564 --> 0:37:44.564
<v Speaker 3>basically pre randomized. It's a little risky, So as long

0:37:44.604 --> 0:37:47.844
<v Speaker 3>as nobody finds your water bottle ahead of time, you

0:37:47.884 --> 0:37:50.524
<v Speaker 3>can pre randomize. And I think he saved some goals

0:37:50.724 --> 0:37:53.204
<v Speaker 3>and England one that particular penalty shootout, which is very

0:37:53.244 --> 0:37:54.244
<v Speaker 3>un English. That's great.

0:37:54.324 --> 0:37:56.804
<v Speaker 2>If you don't think that athletes are thinking about the

0:37:56.844 --> 0:37:59.484
<v Speaker 2>stuff professional athletes, then you're wrong.

0:37:59.604 --> 0:37:59.764
<v Speaker 3>Right.

0:37:59.804 --> 0:38:02.484
<v Speaker 2>They may have their coaching staffs encouraging them to do it,

0:38:02.484 --> 0:38:04.564
<v Speaker 2>they may talk about themselves. They may even do some

0:38:04.604 --> 0:38:09.084
<v Speaker 2>of the stuff like fairly intuitively. Right, In an NBA game,

0:38:09.444 --> 0:38:11.124
<v Speaker 2>you have five players and twenty four seconds on the

0:38:11.124 --> 0:38:12.724
<v Speaker 2>shot clock, so it's kind of a game of like

0:38:13.364 --> 0:38:16.884
<v Speaker 2>trying to maximize your expected value with the best shot

0:38:16.964 --> 0:38:19.524
<v Speaker 2>you can, but the defense is trying to minimize your

0:38:19.524 --> 0:38:22.844
<v Speaker 2>expected value. And like the decisions these players make are

0:38:22.964 --> 0:38:25.884
<v Speaker 2>usually pretty smart about, like it's not quite worth taking

0:38:25.884 --> 0:38:27.564
<v Speaker 2>this shot, but now time's running out and now I

0:38:27.564 --> 0:38:28.724
<v Speaker 2>need to you know, I think a lot of the

0:38:28.804 --> 0:38:31.684
<v Speaker 2>actually quite high IQ. Frankly, there's a lot of money

0:38:31.844 --> 0:38:35.524
<v Speaker 2>and competitive pride on the line in making the right decisions.

0:38:35.964 --> 0:38:39.964
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, so, Nate. Actually, Caleb has been thinking about underhanded

0:38:39.964 --> 0:38:43.044
<v Speaker 1>free throws in the NBA. Here's what he says. From

0:38:43.084 --> 0:38:45.684
<v Speaker 1>what I understand, some of not most players could hit

0:38:45.724 --> 0:38:50.444
<v Speaker 1>a higher free throw percentage if they practiced an underhand technique. Honestly,

0:38:50.524 --> 0:38:53.524
<v Speaker 1>I respect basketball pros less after learning that they don't

0:38:53.604 --> 0:38:56.724
<v Speaker 1>use underhanded free throws because they think it looks goofy.

0:38:56.844 --> 0:39:00.524
<v Speaker 1>It's not a winning mentality. So, Nate, should NBA players

0:39:00.564 --> 0:39:02.164
<v Speaker 1>switch to underhanded free throws?

0:39:02.644 --> 0:39:07.604
<v Speaker 2>Yeah? Look, there probably are some equilibriums where strategies that

0:39:07.644 --> 0:39:12.844
<v Speaker 2>are considered emasculated, right or embarrassing, somehow it might be

0:39:12.924 --> 0:39:17.164
<v Speaker 2>pursued a bit less right, although maybe that changes too. Right,

0:39:17.204 --> 0:39:19.644
<v Speaker 2>You've now seen a thing in the NBA where there's

0:39:19.644 --> 0:39:21.524
<v Speaker 2>a lot more flopping than there once was, meaning that

0:39:21.564 --> 0:39:25.124
<v Speaker 2>when guys get foul, they'll exaggerate the magnitude of what

0:39:25.244 --> 0:39:28.044
<v Speaker 2>actually happened to them. Right, It used to be something

0:39:28.084 --> 0:39:31.684
<v Speaker 2>people associated with soccer. It's migrated into the NBA as well.

0:39:31.724 --> 0:39:34.324
<v Speaker 2>But yeah, sometimes to take strategies that would be seen

0:39:34.364 --> 0:39:37.964
<v Speaker 2>as embarrassing, there's expected value there if you don't care

0:39:38.004 --> 0:39:39.004
<v Speaker 2>about the embarrassment.

0:39:40.364 --> 0:39:43.364
<v Speaker 3>I'm curious, guys, is there an example in Poka of

0:39:43.404 --> 0:39:46.484
<v Speaker 3>a strategy that is positive expected value but everyone thinks

0:39:46.524 --> 0:39:48.644
<v Speaker 3>he's just embarrassing it. Only an idiot would do it.

0:39:48.724 --> 0:39:52.324
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, there's one that has turned out to be much

0:39:52.364 --> 0:39:55.444
<v Speaker 1>better than people thought, and it's called dunk betting, which

0:39:55.484 --> 0:39:58.764
<v Speaker 1>is leading into the preflop raiser. And so the reason

0:39:58.804 --> 0:40:01.164
<v Speaker 1>it's called dunk betting is because people thought you were

0:40:01.164 --> 0:40:04.164
<v Speaker 1>a dunk donkey if you did it right, because the

0:40:04.404 --> 0:40:08.444
<v Speaker 1>established wisdom is you always check to the preflop raiser.

0:40:09.444 --> 0:40:11.724
<v Speaker 1>Once we got more advanced game theory, it turns out

0:40:11.724 --> 0:40:14.204
<v Speaker 1>that no, actually there are some spots where you should lead.

0:40:14.124 --> 0:40:16.004
<v Speaker 3>What is leading into a preflup raiser.

0:40:15.804 --> 0:40:18.564
<v Speaker 1>Betting first, right, instead of checking your options so that

0:40:18.724 --> 0:40:22.684
<v Speaker 1>letting the other person act, you act first, you bet first.

0:40:23.084 --> 0:40:25.884
<v Speaker 1>To this day, though, even though it's now accepted, if

0:40:25.924 --> 0:40:30.364
<v Speaker 1>someone does it right away, it still feels donkeyish even

0:40:30.444 --> 0:40:33.764
<v Speaker 1>when it's not right. It's very hard to kind of

0:40:33.764 --> 0:40:36.164
<v Speaker 1>wrap your mind around the fact that this might actually

0:40:36.204 --> 0:40:37.724
<v Speaker 1>be the correct play.

0:40:38.524 --> 0:40:40.684
<v Speaker 2>One other play that can be hard to make is

0:40:41.324 --> 0:40:44.484
<v Speaker 2>folding when you've already put a lot of money in

0:40:44.524 --> 0:40:46.044
<v Speaker 2>the pot and there's just a little bit more to

0:40:46.084 --> 0:40:49.284
<v Speaker 2>put in and see the showdown. But still sometimes you

0:40:49.404 --> 0:40:51.884
<v Speaker 2>maybe do have a fold potentially. You know, I played

0:40:52.684 --> 0:40:55.324
<v Speaker 2>one unusual hand at a tournament a couple of months

0:40:55.324 --> 0:40:59.284
<v Speaker 2>ago where I raise, a second player called, and a

0:40:59.324 --> 0:41:03.484
<v Speaker 2>third player reraise, and if I was gonna call, I

0:41:03.524 --> 0:41:07.164
<v Speaker 2>was committing about half my stack, right, which means ordinarily

0:41:07.164 --> 0:41:09.284
<v Speaker 2>what you're supposed to do is either fold or go ahead,

0:41:09.524 --> 0:41:11.764
<v Speaker 2>go all in. However, I had a hand that I

0:41:11.804 --> 0:41:14.804
<v Speaker 2>wanted to encourage the third player to enter the part,

0:41:14.924 --> 0:41:16.804
<v Speaker 2>so I just called, and I'm like, well, I'll have

0:41:16.844 --> 0:41:18.204
<v Speaker 2>a lot of good flops and if I don't have

0:41:18.204 --> 0:41:20.244
<v Speaker 2>a good flop then I can get away. It's a

0:41:20.284 --> 0:41:23.404
<v Speaker 2>bad flop and anyways, so yeah, like, so I miss

0:41:23.764 --> 0:41:26.044
<v Speaker 2>the flop, which is the first three cards in poker.

0:41:26.644 --> 0:41:29.964
<v Speaker 2>He bets and I falled, getting three and a half

0:41:30.164 --> 0:41:31.724
<v Speaker 2>two one not. She's like, what are you doing, man?

0:41:31.724 --> 0:41:33.604
<v Speaker 2>You're not allowed to fall there, right, which indicated I

0:41:33.644 --> 0:41:35.244
<v Speaker 2>think that he had a good hand and was hoping

0:41:35.244 --> 0:41:37.484
<v Speaker 2>that I continued right, But like, you know, I ran

0:41:37.564 --> 0:41:39.724
<v Speaker 2>the math later and I'm like, actually, this is the

0:41:39.804 --> 0:41:41.644
<v Speaker 2>right play by a couple of percentage points. It was

0:41:41.684 --> 0:41:44.004
<v Speaker 2>just an embarrassing play to make in the moment.

0:41:44.964 --> 0:41:48.244
<v Speaker 3>So I have learned no donk betting for me. And

0:41:48.324 --> 0:41:51.764
<v Speaker 3>I've also learned from Nate that sometimes you have to quit,

0:41:51.964 --> 0:41:54.244
<v Speaker 3>whether or not you are ahead. We have to quit.

0:41:54.364 --> 0:41:58.844
<v Speaker 3>We're out of time, Nate, Maria. This has been such fun.

0:41:58.924 --> 0:42:00.844
<v Speaker 1>Thank you so much, Tim, Thank you for having us.

0:42:00.884 --> 0:42:03.964
<v Speaker 3>Tim, I always love listening to Whiskey Business, and thank

0:42:04.004 --> 0:42:07.684
<v Speaker 3>you so much for joining us on Cautionary Questions. Thank you, Tim.

0:42:07.724 --> 0:42:10.364
<v Speaker 3>We'll do it again sometime. Thank you, Thank you. I

0:42:10.484 --> 0:42:19.324
<v Speaker 3>will be back next week with another cautionary tale. Cautionary

0:42:19.364 --> 0:42:22.284
<v Speaker 3>Tales is written by me Tim Harford, with Andrew Wright,

0:42:22.484 --> 0:42:26.444
<v Speaker 3>Alice Fines, and Ryan Dilly. It's produced by Georgia Mills

0:42:26.604 --> 0:42:30.364
<v Speaker 3>and Marilyn Rust. The sound design and original music are

0:42:30.404 --> 0:42:33.964
<v Speaker 3>the work of Pascal Wise. Additional sound design is by

0:42:34.004 --> 0:42:38.284
<v Speaker 3>Carlos San Juan at Brain Audio. Bend A Dafh Haffrey

0:42:38.484 --> 0:42:42.044
<v Speaker 3>edited the scripts. The show features the voice talents of

0:42:42.124 --> 0:42:47.244
<v Speaker 3>Melanie Guttridge, Stella Harford, Oliver Hembrough, Sarah Jubb, Mas Sam Monroe,

0:42:47.644 --> 0:42:51.604
<v Speaker 3>Jamal Westman, and Rufus Wright. The show also wouldn't have

0:42:51.644 --> 0:42:55.284
<v Speaker 3>been possible without the work of Jacob Weisberg, Gretta Cohene,

0:42:55.324 --> 0:43:00.164
<v Speaker 3>Sarah Nix, Eric Sandler, Carrie Brody, Christina Sullivan, Kira Posey

0:43:00.364 --> 0:43:05.564
<v Speaker 3>and Owen Miller. Cautionary Tales is a production of Pushkin Industries.

0:43:05.724 --> 0:43:09.924
<v Speaker 3>It's recorded at Wardoor Studios in London by Tom Barry.

0:43:10.444 --> 0:43:13.284
<v Speaker 3>If you like the show, please remember to share, rate

0:43:13.524 --> 0:43:15.684
<v Speaker 3>and review. It really makes a difference to us and

0:43:15.724 --> 0:43:18.364
<v Speaker 3>if you want to hear the show, add free sign

0:43:18.444 --> 0:43:21.044
<v Speaker 3>up to Pushkin Plus on the show page on Apple

0:43:21.084 --> 0:43:31.964
<v Speaker 3>Podcasts or at pushkin dot Fm, slash plus