> Then my question to you would be why do you feel that? Is it based on evidence?
Well signaling is a thing thats been developed since humanity exists. For me thats evidence enough. If singaling would be inefficent, it would not still be such an important factor in human interaction.
It's the same with job interviews. No matter how smart you are, you better be on time and show some manners. Because if you don't, you'll be asked: "If you are that smart, why don't you understand that you are not getting a job this way?" and frankly, there's not a good anwser to that.
> If singaling would be inefficent, it would not still be such an important factor in human interaction.
That really depends.
If you avoid a bad hire 10% of the time by rejecting everyone who is late then that can be a good trade off for you even though you have rejected many great candidates. There is a significant cost to a bad hire.
On the other hand you can read a chapter of a book at your local library for free and for a minimal time investment and then decide if you want to keep reading it.
I'd rate Talebs work as significantly more influential and insightful than Pinkers although I agree with Pinker more often.
Then my question to you would be why do you feel that? Is it based on evidence?
Many of the worlds greatest scientists and philosophers have been jerks e.g. Aristotle was a massive sexist.
Or look at the long list of geniuses who were unstable like Galois.
Taleb has always put his money where his mouth is - to me that's a better indicator than poor manners.