Nassim and Paul Wilmott Offer 2-Day Seminar in London, March 12-13

Nassim and Paul Wilmott are offering their “infamous” two-day seminar “Quantitative Risk Management: In Theory and In Practice” on March 12th and 13th, in London. Here are the points that will be addressed:

  • What is risk?
  • What are fat tails?
  • The idea of fragility and how to measure it
  • Size and scaling
  • The law of large numbers in the real world
  • What is complexity?
  • How to price options using different distributions
  • How to simulate fat tails
  • How to measure model risk
  • How not to measure model risk
  • Sometimes it’s wrong to use probabilities
  • The concept of delta-alpha
  • The commonest quant mistakes
  • The Greeks that give you false hope
  • Why calibration does not work
  • The dangers of correlation
  • The importance of nonlinearity
  • Volatility nonsense
  • What commonsense tells you about volatility, and turning that into a model
  • Why simple models are often the best and why too much math can be dangerous
  • A summary of what to do and where the real world is different


To register, please visit the Wilmott Forums.

Nassim Attempts to Uberize Publishing with Descartes Monographs

Nassim shares his latest monograph (co-authored by Raphael Douady) and introduces his new venture in publishing at the same time:

Descartes Monographs accept only manuscripts that have been rigorously peer-
reviewed or contain material that has appeared in peer-reviewed journals or has
been sufficiently cited to merit inclusion in the series. Its aim is to “Überize”
academic publishing by cutting the middleperson and producing books of the
highest scientific quality at the most affordable price. Descartes engages in ethical
publishing, avoiding double-charging the public sector for books produced on
university time.

From his Facebook Page.


Nassim Taleb on GMOs


On GMOs: “A pound of algebra is worth a ton of verbal commentary”. I managed to fit the Precautionary Principle into a few lines. The GMO paid propagandists are pounding tons of verbalistic statements (even an incompetent smear campaign), but this simple summary should cancel about everything they are trying to say. In a single column. They need to refute my representation or show that f(breeding) has the same maximum as f(GMOs).

>>Source Facebook

Nassim Posts Document on Skepticism and How Uncertainty Should Actually Lead to More Conservationism

Nassim recently posted a document called “Skepticism” on Facebook.

He had this to say about it:

Something people don’t get: more skepticism about climate models should lead to more “green” ecological conservationist policies not more lax pro-pollution ones. Why? Simply, uncertainty about the models increases fragility (and thickens the left tail), no matter what the benefits can be in the right tail.
Added the section to the precautionary principle. Please discuss but stick to rigor and avoid buzzwords. (Also do not think that the idea is falling from the sky: it is a mere application of the fragility theorems).