News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Dude, You Broke the Future (2017) by dragonwriter on Sunday July 12, 2020 @07:28PM (#23815611)
> Nobody among the intellectual class anticipated Trump's election in 2016.

A number of people in the intellectual world did, or at least wrote articles purporting to explain why it was more than remotely possible.

The relatively new set of people in the major media trying to play the poll-based mathematical prediction game that Nate Silver started with 538 who weren't Nate Silver undersold the chances of it happening because they made the naive mistake assuming that deviations from polling averages between states were independent of each other rather than, as historical analysis of the type Silver does would show, tightly correlated. But “media outlets want what Silver does but can't afford to pay to have Silver, or anyone with anything like his level of skill at what he does” doesn't represent the “intellectual class”.

Re:Dude, You Broke the Future (2017) by saalweachter on Sunday July 12, 2020 @10:16PM (#23816551)
I think it's also absurd to treat the less likely of the two plausible possible winners of the US Presidential election winning as some sort of black swan event as opposed to "well within the realm of possibility".

I'm not sure even Jill Stein or Gary Johnson would really be a black swan event, given that I can list it as a possibility, but it's definitely a lot more gray than "either the Democrat or Republican wins".