Glad she acknowledges this. If it doesn't cost her anything to make incorrect predictions, stringing together correct ones isn't nearly as impressive. The top comment on NPR also mentions groupthink within the CIA -- very likely, I think. A tendency to blame the same people and look for the same causes, to impose patterns for their own sanity ... not remotely surprising.I don't have a professional reputation at stake. And it's this anonymity which actually gives me freedom to make true forecasts."
If the group of "superforecasters" continued to perform on par with what the level of accuracy was that earned them admission to said group, that'd convince me.
I think this gives more credence to the Chomskian "this is not stuff you can be an expert at" saw.
Fascinating. I registered to see if I can be a part of this, one of my deep interests is foreign affairs.
How so? Because I happen to know more about foreign affairs than the average person? My understanding was that anybody is eligible for it, though they prefer those who are college educated. I wouldn't say my knowledge is that of an expert; I just like to keep up to date. Perhaps having a person who is up to date on world events would throw off the study, I just don't know how much knowledge would be unacceptable.
Therein lies the problem. It's hard to measure exactly how much you know, it'd be easier to just accept self-professed "average", maybe even "otherwise disinterested" folks. I mean, this is all speculation, the study's specific parameters aren't public, as far as I could find....I just don't know how much knowledge would be unacceptable.