Let me give a metaphor; If I leave a small piece of ice cube on the floor and ask you to predict how the ice cube will melt. It is very simple answer to be predicted.

Now if I recommend you, condition of not having seen initially the ice cube and you ask where is the water on the floor coming from?

Please stop to listen and provide the relevant answer .You see it is extremely very difficult to give the accurate answer? Why because you will come up with answers of different shapes. It is exactly like going from theory to practice is extremely difficult than from practice to theory. Therefore given something you observe, the generator of the of the observable will be a theory- you have an infinity of theory.Particulary when you are dealing non linearity with Hence theory is born from practice. Most experts retrofit the story.

Phenomelogy- optionality which are anticipatory than backward fitting. Which why the first Program Business Robust strategic will be release not at the beginning of February but by 31/1/2017 is knowledge without a cause, help you avoid tons losses of your hard earning you invested out in many programs getting rich quick schemes – and you never get close there and never get close to the ultimate results . Yes we don't have theories- we store facts. Hence we are a lot better at doing than knowing. Why because of evolution.

1. Just as the magnificent ,the maverick entrepreneurs, venture capitalist out there focus on losses and rookies focus on profits- which even explain why most expert will always what to do to drive profits and completely forgetting that you live long by not dying.Buffett

.

2 Bad things only come hard upon those who have lived without giving it a thought and whose attention

has been exclusively directed to happiness and deriving profits. Disease, captivity, disaster, bankruptcies, are none of them unexpected. Therefore ore If you takes this into your inmost heart and looks upon all the misfortunes of other men, of which there is always a great plenty, in this spirit, remembering that there is nothing to prevent their coming upon him also, he will arm himself against them long before they attack him.

3-The problem can be best explained with this martial principle: The art of war teaches us to rely not on the likelihood of the enemy's not coming, but on our own readiness to receive him; not on the chance of his not attacking, but rather on the fact that we have made

our position unassailable.

All what I am saying is, since we are living in a world that has become more complex due to globalisation and internet. Which has as direct consequence: A huge increase of unpredictability and a high decrease of predictability .Life is no more about getting predictions "right"; it is about knowing how to navigate the environment and controlling it.and BRS IS ANTICIPATORY RATHER THAN BACKWARDS FITTING

When we look at even, we tend to look at causes that are visible to us, we don't look at the cemetery, meaning the things that are not obvious and salient to us. Yes history tend to kill a lot of information that was not deemed relevant at the time. Just as if you want know the causes to become multimillionaire –you will hear beautifully well-crafted and compelling words of self-appointed consultants and experts, data scientists purport that risk taking and working hard are necessary. After all, almost all rich people took risk and work hard. But it doesn't mean that taking risk and working hard make you successful unless if you take the cemetery of bankrupt people and force them to write their biography, you will discover that that they share the same traits.

Therefore

1. Taking risk and working hard are necessary to become rich and also a source to become bankrupt. And you only see the winners, not the losers- hence
2. Hence History is written by the winners not by the losers
3. The answer here is simple and easy. A system with small mistakes doesn't have a high ration of bankruptcies. Why? Most people outthere are unconditionally afraid of failure without conditioning what type of system they are in or what type of failure it is "Remember 2 types of mistake"
4. Fourth most experts and consultants out there selling programs of how to get rich quick scheme by conflating benefit with absence of risk. Another of saying it is mistaking absence of evidence for evidence of absence. Just like discussing growth without concern for fragility: like studying construction without thinking of collapses. Think like engineer not like an expert who gives you prediction (hence knowledge which turn out to be fragile). Warren Buffett put it this way "you cannot succeed if you cannot survive", hence first and foremost you must build a robust system. Yes Business Robust Strategic will not be release by the beginning of February but by the end of January 2017.

Life isn't about getting predictions "right"; it is about knowing how to navigate the environment and controlling it. This by the way is title of the next podcast

Let us talk about data analytic namely let us talk today about unpredictability by following the logical steps

First do you believe that you can use data to predict systematically what is going on? Please write your answer down.

Second question. Are you aware of something we call world of finance or Wall Street?

Third question. How many correlation metrics or data do we have in 2007 before the financial crises? How large it was or how big it was?

Answer: Between half a billion and a Billion correlation we had in finance .Guess what/Nobody knew what the hell was going out there and most importantly the pundits and experts. So as direct conclusion data is not what we needed or wanted .Just as a good friend of mine who is actually a mentor went to Washington to testify against spending more money on data – since we get confuse by data. The congressman told him – Sir John when you cross the street you don't look

When I cross the street I remove data- because you have billions of information, all what I am interested in is crossing the street – I am not interested of the eye colour of drivers or what is their intention – how are they dress, I am only interested in large items that are moving. Hence I apply via negative"PS ",yes the more data you put in, the less you are going to see.

Financial crisis after the event, we are very good at looking through the review mirror with the firm conviction we are looking straight ahead – in another words we have the inability to prospectively predict and the ability to retrospectively predict. This a problem of human nature, finds usually in social science and not in hard science.

Another example; Take the Skinner's box experiment.BF Skinner took a pigeon and put in a box and fed the pigeon randomnly.Over time the bird thought, by standing on one leg it was fed last time – it does it again, it will be fed again .All what I am saying is that we human have a tendency to immediately establish the cause too quickly even when we do not have reason to establish cause. Yes we favour the visible, the tangible, the well narrated and we scorn the abstract.

So we are shifting from predictive method to the assessment to the effect of something you are exposure – in another words are you fragile or are robust to some class of exposure.

-The one big idea to take away is that fragility is vastly more important in place of predictive analytic in the sense where fragility is much more measurable and much more rigorous approach by trying to confuse people by making prediction that cause people to take more risk

Let me clarify the main idea behind what scientists call hedonic treadmill.

Making $1 million in one year, but nothing in the preceding nine, does not bring the same pleasure as having the total evenly distributed over the same period, that is, $100,000 every year for ten years in a row. The same applies to the inverse order—making a bundle the first year, then nothing for the remaining period.

Your happiness depends far more on the number of instances of positive feelings, what psychologists call "positive affect," than on their intensity when they hit. Mother Nature destined us to derive enjoyment from a steady flow of

Pleasant small, but frequent, rewards. As I said, the rewards do not have to be large, just frequent—a little bit here, a little bit there.

Sadly, it may be even worse for you to make $10 million, then lose back nine, than to making nothing at all! True, you may end up with a million (as compared to nothing), but it may be better had you got zero.(This assumes, of course, that you care about financial rewards.)

In the meantime, Consider that our major satisfaction for thousands of years came in the form of food and water (and something else more private), and that while we need these steadily, we quickly reach saturation.

Let me give you another insightful example. How well can we predict our emotions? Would winning the lotto make us the happiest people alive for many years to come? Dan Gilbert world renown

Psychologist from Harvard university who studied lottery winners, surprisingly discovered that the happiness effect melt down over time few months.so as direct conclusion after having win the jackpot of the lotto, we fall back to our previous contentment or discontentment.

So many are far no better: Well people who progress in their careers are in term of happiness, are right back where they started three months ago. From the same line people who buy the latest Bugatti Veyron or the most luxurious mansion around the block. Science call this the Hedonic treadmill- indeed we work hard, advance and are able to afford more, better and nicer things and this doesn't make us any happier.

Where really lies the problem about a long lasting happiness is that we do not live in an environment where

Results are delivered in a steady manner—rare events, outliers, the unexpected dominate much of human history. It is unfortunate that the right strategy for our current environment may not offer internal rewards and positive feedback.

The same property in reverse applies to our unhappiness. It is better to lump all your pain into a brief period rather than have it spread out over a longer one. Unless it will look like Chinese torture

Well wouldn't it be nice if we knew how happy a new career or relationship or would make us? Well use these scientific heuristic to make better and brighter decisions;

• Avoid at all costs anything that generate chronic stress such as being around dull and stressful people,commuting,noise
• I declare, is happy whom nothing makes less strong than he is; he keeps to the heights, leaning upon none but himself; for one who sustains himself by any prop may fall.(in the meantime I am not saying you should not trust people trust people – namely trust them – but check ,yes you have the last decision- since it is the unexpected that puts the heaviest load upon us. Hence randomness doesn't look random but how its affect some people is not.
• Develop a mind that is steadfast and resolutely clings to a good judgment, how? I am glad you ask by gaining a complete view of truth, by maintaining, in all that you do, order, measure, fitness, and a will that is inoffensive and kindly.

1. Follow your passions even if you have to invest a portion of your income
2. Invest in friendship and or most people most professional status achieve long lasting happiness and in the meantime mingle by reserving three to days in a row in a month during which you shall be content with the scantiest and cheapest fare, with coarse and rough dress, saying to yourself the while: "Is this the condition that I feared?" just as In days of peace the soldier performs manoeuvres, throws up earthworks with no enemy in sight, and wearies himself by gratuitous toil, in order that he may be equal to unavoidable toil.

For Millennia, Europeans thought that all swan were white- because everywhere they looked, swans were always white. Till In year 1697 the Dutch explorer Willem de Vlamingh saw a black swan in Australia and sure enough one single observation can destroy millennia of confirmation – likewise Take the story of the Turkey "For those of you who haven listen or watch, I hugely recommend you as soon as possible to give it a try. If you are employee and after 40 years, you are lay off the street. You have a negative black swan- you have the Tsunami of 2003 in east Asia. Another negative Black swan.

The black swan can also be positive: For example:

Take the invention of the computer. The internet which by the way was previously a military application is to use as a mean for communicate and business purposes. Consider the Viagra came from the hypertension drug.Aspirine made for headache, later it turns out to be fibber reducer and guess what today it is use as blood thinner.

The black Swan is a way of saying, Just because you never see something `happens, doesn't mean it won't; meaning sometimes – even highly improbable happens, in a more simplistic way the black swan event is something that happens as result of our incomplete knowledge of understanding the world

The black swan is about robustness of certain class of events we cannot compute or predict

Take the case membership sites. Steadiness which makes you very fragile-since your risk are hidden.So you can lose not only because of the competitor, but because a business may mutate into something else- moreover the The fundamentally error which is supposedly risk free approach- the back Swan event.

So what can be done? Put yourself in situations where you can catch a ride of positive black swans by not being a wall but a windmill that turn volatility,variation,error,the unknown ,randomness ,time,stressor,option into profits.

For example: Become an artist, a writer, book publisher, entrepreneur, venture capitalist, biotechnology with a scalable product. These professions by definition belong to extremistan –where it is the exception that dominate. If you are selling or trading your time for money (for example: as employee, dentist, masseur therapist etc...).You are waiting in vain for such a break.Here these professions belong to mediocristan where it is the collection of the regular that counts.

This is the reason why we here in optionality profits help entrepreneurs, aspiring entrepreneurs' investors, and decision-makers by protecting you from sinking and by providing a systematic approach under incomplete information and incomplete understanding by building systems where mistakes can occur – without threaten the system and most importantly recycle and use as fuel for improvement. After all to make systems robust, all risks must be visible and out in the open—fluctuat nec mergitur (it fluctuates but does not sink) goes the latin saying. Just as a robust economic system is one that encourages early failures (the concepts of "fail small" and "fail fast"),) than having a risk free approach- meaning base on prediction. "Lastly Man's error are his portals of discovery" James Joyce

The central insight here is that with world that has become more complex, due globalisation and the internet- black swan events(rare events) 1- are more frequent today ,2- When its happens it is vastly more consequential than we can imagine

How to Spot an Impostor or a Charlatan?

In 1948 the psychologist Bertram Forer made an unusual and surprising experiment. First and foremost, he used astrology columns from a wide range of magazines. He then gave his pupils meaning his students to read and rate themselves after their own assessment.

Well here is the experiment. It may surprise you .Dear listener or watcher .I know you personally and here is the way I would characterise you. You greatly like to be appreciated and like by people. You have a propensity to self-critical with yourself. You have an enormous reservoir of unused capacity- which you have not mine yet to your advantage. You have some personality weaknesses, which you can generally overcompensate for them. From outside, you are self-controlled and self-disciplined. From the inside you are tend to worry and feel insecure. Sometimes you doubt whether you made the right the decision. You like change and become unsatisfied when hinder by obstacles. You like the fact that, you are an independent thinker and do not swallow whatever is purported to you without evidence.

You find unwise to reveal yourself to completely expose yourself to people. There are moments where you are sociable meaning extroverted and moment where you are introvert. Your thoughts are always about, the hope of a better life- the future glory of your name or the fly of the illness of life. Some of your aspirations are sometimes unrealistic.

Key question: Do you recognise yourself within these lines. In the scale of 1 to 10, how would rate yourself? (Here 1 you score poorly and 10; you score perfection.

When the students rated themselves by 9.3 of 10.So the total accuracy was 86%.The experiment was repeated over decades and decades and the results turnout to be closely the same.

I bet you rated yourself by 9 or 10 to. Most people tend to identify themselves in such universal descriptions. Science calls this the Forer effects .By the way the Forer explain why pseudo-science such as astrology, astrotherapy, handwriting, analysis, tarot card.

What is really behind the Forer effect is that, the majority of the statements are too general and therefore apply to anyone of us. "Anyone of us is proud for being independent thinker "Who isn't? Who likes to see him or herself as a dunce follower?

The second thing in the Forer effect is the feature positive effect plays a large rule: Yes- indeed reread or relisten and you will spot that- the text contains no negative statement. It stated only what we are and did not include – what we are not. Just as reading a heathy recipe of salad which omits to include the rate of cholesterol in the oil dressing right.

Third the king of all errors- which is the confirmation bias- meaning taking seriously who we are (correspond to our self-image) and unconsciously filter out who we are not.

By the way this is what is used by most consultants, experts, decision makers across board in different industry. Yes we have the strong tendency to retain elements that seem to confirm our thesis and we forget what I call silent evidence.EG; Multimillionaire.

Second example:A look at the profit and lost clearly shows that savings can be made.We advice company to focus on emerging economies to secure future market share.Sound about right No?

How would you rate the prowess of such a guru?

The kernel point of my thoughts and big take away are the following two big ideas

1-An impostor or a charlatan Conflates or mistake benefit for absence of risk just as discussing growth without concern for fragility: like studying construction without thinking of collapses. Think like engineer not economist Buffett" "In order to succeed, you must first survive."

2- an impostor is always giving recipe for what to do and never what not to do or avoid. Forgetting that we live long by not dying.

3- The tragedy of our time is the monoculture of ideas: all people are forced to believe the *same* errors. By the way it take a lot of self-confidence and intellect to recognise-that what make sense; really doesn't make sense.eg Most books about how to and scientific which become bestsellers aren't due to their validity or relevancy but to social contagion via marketing and sensationalisation.

www.optionalityprofits.com

If someone tries to trick you with "Evidence-based analysis", show him this story of the turkey

This Story of The Turkey

Consider the following story, borrows from Bertrand Russell and adapted by me

A turkey is fed for 1000 days by a butcher and everyday confirms to the turkey and turkey's business's paid membership site or offline- paid subscription's site and offline, the turkey's risk management department in a company, and the turkey's analytic department in a business, the turkey's statistic department of a company - that the butcher loves the turkey with increase statiscal evidence. And every day bring more confidence to the statement. But until 1001 days there something in the US call thanks giving, it is never a good idea to be a turkey that day .there is going to be a big surprise event or black swan of disastrous consequence for the turkey in another word the Turkey becomes death meat. What about the Butcher?Well I will give the answer at the end of this episode

This story proves in nutshell 3 things.

• We human are usually very good at managing the ordinary( in another words we human are very good at predicting the regular, the ordinary- or we human are very good at handling the small and excellent of being fool by the outlier, the rare, the exception) eg: HSBC in England last year 2015,lay off or redundant
• Randomness or uncertainty doesn't look random, therefore don't be fool by the historical trend. Employee, or even membership.
• The story illustrate the major problem of modernity couple with the rise of complexity: Eg: employee, indeed the turkey is mistaking absence of evidence (no harm) for evidence of absence. Here the turkey thought it is facing something predictable, when in reality it is facing something unpredictable than it thinks. "A mistake that prevail across board. Namely in consultancy circles, businesses circles, intellectuals circles, policy makers circles, individual lives circles and social science.

Well what is the big take away here? Remember I asked the question about the butcher. The answer is :It is not a black swan to the butcher and the whole idea or big take away of the turkey story is not to be a Turkey.

How? By avoiding be evidence base and seeking Negative information which reduces the space of what we do by knowledge of what does not work. We need to pay for negative results. Why quiet simply because in a world that is stable and doesn't change, intelligence is about noticing things that are relevant (meaning detecting pattern)- whereas in a complex world- meaning uncertainty, the unknown, intelligence consists in ignoring things that are irrelevant (avoiding false pattern)

. Therefore you can easily discount anecdotes and stories and go to the core subject by making sound judgment.

Welcome to the world of uncertainty- we in optionality profits have after all with the rise of complexity – we are more prone to errors ,and since we are in an environment where we can make mistake;we can also benefit from them.Jeff Bezos put it this way" "If someone tries to take all failure out of a process, innovation will cease..... Failure and invention are inseparable twins." After all, man's errors are his portals of discovery

Why We Humans Feel the good less Intensely Than The Bad?

Loss Aversion

I will build a wall on the border between Mexico and the US ,I will take all the jobs overseas and bring them back home.Does that ring a bell the promotor of these promises? Donald Trump .These disadvantages which are vastly consequential and powerful anchors to move people to action. (Obviously here in optionality profits.com we advocate that any offer muss be based on noble, ethical and full of integrity from our part- since we have skin in the game.)

Why are we wired to be moved by pain and act immediately to avoid it? Well base on our evolutionary past, one slight error would lead to exit the gene pool – meaning you were dead right away. So negligence could have lead on the hunt or a broken leg was sufficient to be excluded of the group, or left alone. The ones who were prudent and combine with good luck made it by surviving. We are the descendants of the ones who survive and transmitted their genes to us.

As vivid example, today No wonder why we feel more pain of losing Euro 10 000 than the joy of gaining Euros 10 000 here

And that asymmetry is just a fact of life. And it affects professionals much less than individuals, because professionals play a repeated game. So, you know, you win a few, you lose a few. Once you have that attitude, you're okay, or you're better off.

But individual feel losses very keenly, and they should be aware of that. And what happens is if you're not aware of that, when things go bad, you'll want to change what you're doing, and that's the disaster in running a business or investing, I think. That's here, it's quite obvious that loss illusion can kill you.

how much are you willing to put at risk? How much are you willing to lose, in fact? Because this is money you should be prepared to lose. And how much do you really want to protect? Now, this is something that people find very natural, that distinction. And then they find it very natural to be quite conservative with the amount they want to protect, and to be fairly bold with the amount they are willing to lose. But psychologically, people have mental accounts, and they want to feel safe on one big sum, and they're willing to gamble on another.

From this reason, if you want convince your audience or a person, avoid to focus on the advantages of your proposal, instead highlight how it would help mitigate or eradicate the disadvantages. Here is a practical example. Let's take the following example borrow from the world renowned novelist Rolf Dobeli; a campaign promoting Breast Self-Examination (BSE). Two different leaflets were handed out to women.

Pamphlet A urged women" Research shows that women who do BSE have an early increase chance of finding a tumour in the early, more treatable state of the disease."

Pamphlet B said: "Research shows women who do not do BSE have a decrease chance of finding a tumour in the early, more treatable state of the decease."

The study revealed that pamphlet B written in (loss frame) generated significant awareness and BSE behaviour than pamphlets A (written in gain-frame)

The direct conclusion is that, we human fear of losing something than to gain something of equal value. If for example, imagine your business is weigh loss. The most effective way to compelling customers to purchase your program or your products how much money they are losing without your program- as opposed to how much money they would save with it, even though the amount is exactly the same.

"The Bozo Explosion In Your Organisation" Steve Jobs

-The more you compare yourself to others, whether favorably or unfavorably, the worse off you will be.

As one of my Podcast episode hit a large audience worldwide, a good friend of mine, hugely successful podcaster and venture capitalist asked me favour. One of his episode's title, slightly similar to my actual most listened one, was on the way to become a blockbuster.so he was persuaded that, me being interviewed by him was a necessary and prerequisite condition to boost his audience largely.

We all know- a fruitful and insightful interview combine with a forward in a book or even a testimonial, ultimately lead to a substantial result. Meaning people will either attend your podcast presentation-buy your book or enrol in one of your program.by the way I have given many interviews and most of them weren't competitive to my episode's title"……..".

Well I ponder about the request of my dear friend. Why would I help an acquainting who actually is a competitor? Or he may indirectly switch my listeners to his favour in the long run?

All of sudden I realised with surprise: this is social comparison at work, which is the tendency to withhold help in term of assistance might outdo you, even if you look like a fool in the long run.

Counterintuitive and insightful interviews, forward of books-testimonial or I quote you, you quote me sort of practical significant of harmless and most importantly beneficial of example of social comparison.

However this phenomenon has reach the peak toxics level in online enterprises, organisations, consultancy, and academics in sense where many of the proponents above are willing to publish in major Media outlets platform, and prestigious journals.Overtime,by pure spurious randomness (whether you are skilful or not as long as you can write a sentence in a book or just be able to express yourself),because the phenomenon of I quote you, you quote me you end up in the top slop of the 3 or 5 accredited and acclaimed expert.as direct consequence you decide who get publish(by the way this is even when the content is irrelevant to the audience).Now think of a youngster who comes out with an incredible finding. Key question, will he be easily published? I doubt in the sense where he will outdo the top of the slot. So he will be kept in the dark.

Keep in mind that social comparison is prevalent across board. Take the start – up industry, Guy Kawasaki, former chief evangelist at apple and today a world renowned Venture capitalist put it this way:" A players hire people even better than themselves. It is clear that B players hire C players so they can feel superior to them and C players hire hires D players". If you start employing B players, expect to be on the rush and swift high way to cemetery. This is what Steve Jobs called "The Bozo explosion" of your company.

The message is to do what, between 1666 and 1667- Isaac Barrow, professor of Isaac Newton did: By giving up his position as professor to join the young prodigy who presented to him, his discoveries during his spare time. Guess what have seen any CEO relinquishing his position to someone better than him or her?

The two big idea to take away here are

1-to foster people who are more talented than you

2- Which is the most important one is to hire people who have the following attributes a) Determination, b) sophistication, c) authenticity, d) convexity meaning (all you need to know is to have the intelligence of realising is what you got is slightly better than what he had before in another word the person hired muss not necessary have high IQ , d) And above all risk loving and from there flows Trial and error and finally e)Resourcefulness

Impostors' prophets

Prediction illusion

After Donald trump got the nomination of Republican Party, a democrat to win the next presidency of the US by 9/11/2016

Ebola propagation to be worldwide by end 2016

After Brexit, EU likely to collapse

No more food in 25 years from now, only pills to be swallowed

Daily consultants, experts and media assail us with prediction but how credible and reliable are they? Well Philipp fetlock in his blockbuster, bestseller book: Expert Political Judgment: How Good Is It? How Can We Know? Over a period of decade meaning 10 years, investigated close to 28,361prediction from 284 self-appointed experts or if you want self-proclaimed professionals.

Surprise – surprise, the result of their accuracy turn out to, in year in the row to pure random coincidence. What is more striking is that – the semi illiterates were way better than the experts.

A pure most vivid example is the most recent one in the presidential election in the US. Guess what the republican nominee Donald Jr Trump won- with a large gap.

Although all the polls purported by different Media outlets out there, turnout to prove the opposite.

Consider this there is is more 1 million economists worldwide who work as full time employees- trying to predict financial crisis and interest rates"Except Dr Nassim taleb who predicted with greater accuracy- the financial crash of 2008". They use sophisticated computers. Can you see the worldwide consequence of crisis of 2008.If these so proclaimed experts were able to forecast, they would multimillionaire self-employed. Is that the case?No

Well, why this problem of wrong prediction persist?

First and foremost there is lack of skin in the game to quote Nassim Taleb.Meaning the predictor or the self-proclaimed expert doesn't eat, his own cocking and therefore is not harm by it.To put is simply, since they make a lot of predictions if they randomly hit the jackpot, the get big financial rewards and get publish in major acclaimed Journal. If they miss forecast, there is no harm to their reputation, no deterrence, no financial penalties, no exist of the gene pool, no filter. So the game keep on going that way.

The recent presidential elections in the US proved three things.

• Experts ,consultants and media are clueless about what is going on out there
• The media are extremely misleading
• The establishment is disconnected from the public – and most importantly the members of establishment believe their job is to think for the rest of us.
• Polls reflects what people say they would do, not actually what they do. Final crisis

Ideally, experts or consultant should have a sort of prediction fund- say £5000.If the forecast is correct, the expert collect his £5000 back plus his lucrative interest. If wrong, I suggest the money goes to charity.

So we live simultaneously in two different world: The mediocristan and the extremistan to quote probably the best risk expert alive today Dr Nassim Taleb

The mediocristan is characterise by it steadiness, regularity, stability, predictability. For if you gather randomly 1000 people a place them on the scale, and add to it the heaviest or biggest person on the planet, How much of the total will he represents? Answer only 0.3 .So in mediocristan the average of the total and the maximum are close each other.

Example: If you are paid per hour, meaning you are employee, your pay is the collection of the regular hours you make within days, weeks and months.

If you are dentist or a backer, you are pay by the number of patients to drill their teeth or the number of breads and cakes etc.. Customers buy. In conclusion you cannot scale your work like an artist or writer or venture capitalist, book publishers' researcher

The extremist an is domain where it the exception, the rare, the outlier that counts, characterise by unpredictability, uncertainty, unpredictability, error, mistake, option,volatility,time,the unknown, incomplete information, incomplete understanding. So let me give you a practical example:

Take again randomly the same 1000 people, we got recently- and instead of weight, let us take wealth and ad to them; the riches person alive today(bill gates).Now key question; How of the total of net worth of the total would he represents? Answer 99.999% of the total.

Or if you line up 1000 authors, close to 2% will bring half of the profits.

So in extremist an it is the exception that counts. Note that you can move from via social contagion and preferential attachment from mediocristan to extremist an.

The biggest problem of experts out there lies two things:

First In seeing patterns where there is none, than to miss on the pattern, or mistake the random with the non-random than the non- random with the random- just as mistaking a bear for a stone rather than a stone for a bear and as consequence you end up in it stomach. Reminder.

Second mistake, with the world that has become more complex, due to globalisation and internet; we are witnessing a huge rise of unpredictability couple with a high decrease of predictability and most consultants,advisors,policy makers, decision makers,experts,data analysts- analyst fall short of The Procrustean bed. Which in life consists precisely in simplifying the nonlinear and making it linear or clarifying by making easier the unpredictable and making it predictable-by the way a simplification that distorts. Reminder "See the bed of Pr"

So here are three big ideas to be taken away.

So when you encounter predictions, or future reward promises- forecast. Take a deep breath and ask yourself the following three question:

• What incentive does the expert have? If he is on salary or minimum wage, is he afraid of losing his position or have financial difficulties?

If he is self-appointed guru, sure enough he make living by selling books and lectures, therefore his prediction relies on media's attention and most importantly his prediction tend to sensational rather that than the statistical relevant.(The large deviation, the rare, the exception just as If you want to get an idea of a friend's temperament, ethics, and personal elegance, you need to look at him under the tests of severe circumstances, not under the regular rosy glow of daily life. Can you assess the danger a criminal poses by examining only what he does on an ordinary day? Indeed the normal, the regular, steadiness is often irrelevant.

Third what is the depth of his pay off over the past 5 to 10 years? Why?Because,the expert can have a perfect track record in prediction for the last 10 years and if the payoff is small, that means it is ireelevant.Hence don't fall short of the law of small numbers (reminder).

Finally remember what the Nobel Prize winner in atom physicist Niels Bohr said about the future "Prediction is very difficult, especially if it is about the future" from the same line F A Hayek put it this way; The mind cannot foresee its own advance