---
id: 2026-05-14T19:16:23-0400
title: 2026-05-14 19:16:23
tags: []
daily: "[[2026-05-14]]"
---
# 2026-05-14 19:16:23 

After [[jared-defanti|Jared]] introduced me to
[complex adaptive systems](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complex_adaptive_system)
and [[2004_gribbin_deep-simplicity]]
I told him about [[hubbard_2020_failure]]'s response
to [[taleb_2001_fooled-by-randomness]]'s main thesis:
That Taleb's warning not to draw conclusions from historical data
is itself a conclusion based on historical data.
Even though I butchered the retelling
Jared laughed out loud,
the way I did when reading the response for the first time.

In the absence of reputable sources,
belief in Taleb's pessimistic view of forecasting
requires one to _want_ for it to be true.
I think my laughter was nervous,
nervous that a position seemed so compelling
until reframed only slightly,
at which point it became ridiculous to consider.

***

I realize now that I totally misunderstood the direction Jared was going.
The Google AI summary of _Deep Simplicity_ was this (emphasis added):

> Deep Simplicity: Bringing Order to Chaos and Complexity by John Gribbin
> explains chaos and complexity theory,
> arguing that seemingly random, complex systems
> (like weather or stock markets)
> arise from simple, underlying laws,
> _making the universe more orderly than it appears_.

I skimmed the summary
and misread the emphasized text
as "making the universe appear more orderly than it is".
I was primed to disagree because we had been talking about Taleb.
It turns out Gribbin would disagree with Taleb too.