
The Forecasting Fallacy - anarbadalov
https://www.alexmurrell.co.uk/articles/the-forecasting-fallacy
======
WoahNoun
This seems to fundamentally miss the reason why we forecast. To quote
Eisenhower:

>Peace-time plans are of no particular value, but peace-time planning is
indispensable.

The end result of these forecasts isn't particularly valuable, but the
thinking used to develop the forecast can help us preempt, react, and respond.
This is like criticizing climate scientists because they didn't get the exact
amount of warming or sea level rise correct in their predictions. I'm not
saying every (or any) consultant forecast is worth reading, but to dismiss the
idea of forecasting because we are wrong is a fundamental misunderstanding of
the value of forecasts.

~~~
senux
> I'm not saying every (or any) consultant forecast is worth reading, but to
> dismiss the idea of forecasting because we are wrong is a fundamental
> misunderstanding of the value of forecasts.

I agree with your original statement but in the portion above you talk about
reading someone else's forecast as if that was equivalent to the forecast
'thinking process' you had mentioned.

Reading the end-result of another individual's analysis won't necessarily give
you the benefits you just mentioned.

------
sega_sai
The only way in my opinion to really separate snake oil sellers from serious
forecasters is to require that the companies or pundits register their
predictions in some database, so one can then assess how often they are wrong.

~~~
simonebrunozzi
Even more than this: they should personally invest.

------
anarbadalov
Hat tip to the fantastic Browser newsletter
([https://thebrowser.com/](https://thebrowser.com/)) for this one. As its
editor & head curator writes:

"How can it be that forecasts of global trends and outcomes are almost always
wrong, yet nobody seems to mind, no stigma attaches, and the appetite for them
seems only to grow?"

From the article: "To understand the extent of our forecasting fascination, I
analysed the websites of three management consultancies looking for
predictions with time frames ranging from 2025 to 2050. Whilst one prediction
may be published multiple times, the size of the numbers still shocked me.
Deloitte’s site makes 6904 predictions. McKinsey & Company make 4296. And
Boston Consulting Group, 3679. ...

I believe the vast majority of these to be not forecasts but fantasies. Snake
oil dressed up as science. Fiction masquerading as fact."

------
mlthoughts2018
The article is misguided in thinking anyone cares about forecast accuracy in
the first place. Accurate forecasting would usurp political authority, since
it would provide a mechanism by which you can accurately hold policy creators
accountable.

“It’s hard to get someone to understand something when their job depends on
not understanding it.”

Robin Hanson wrote very well about this years ago:

[https://www.cato-unbound.org/2011/07/13/robin-hanson/who-
car...](https://www.cato-unbound.org/2011/07/13/robin-hanson/who-cares-about-
forecast-accuracy)

------
jariel
We can predict GDP. Everyone knows ballpark where it will be without calamity.

The GDP is an overal measure of something not based on 'events'.

What we cannot predict are 'events' \- like COVID, or a rash of market
information coming to light like 2008 causing a domino effect.

Predicting marketing spend is like predicting what colour someone will chose
for their favorite colour: it's within some range, but it's a choice.

------
di4na
I want to point out that Tetlock went into checking if there were ways to get
better forecast and better forecaster.

It was the Good Judgement Project, and the results are slightly more positive

------
wodenokoto
To what degree does the predictions alter the future?

