Reddit reviews: The best investment analysis & strategy books

We found 91 Reddit comments discussing the best investment analysis & strategy books. We ran sentiment analysis on each of these comments to determine how redditors feel about different products. We found 10 products and ranked them based on the amount of positive reactions they received. Here are the top 20.

idea-bulb Interested in what Redditors like? Check out our Shuffle feature

Shuffle: random products popular on Reddit

Top Reddit comments about Investment Analysis & Strategy:

u/organizedfellow · 2 pointsr/Entrepreneur

Here are all the books with amazon links, Alphabetical order :)


u/ryanbuck_ · 1 pointr/politics

That is the best argued opposing point I’ve seen on Reddit to date.

I’m pretty sure it’s actually a valid argument, so Kudos.

This brings us to the definition of Liberty and the question of what we want America to be in a very direct fashion. (It also supports the studies that say that the right has a strong disgust response compared to the left. I’m boring sexually, but I’m not grossed out by people who are LGBT whatever. I’m sad about abortion, but I don’t have an overwhelming feeling of revulsion about it. And I honestly think many people do.)

If you get the time, check this blog post out. It’s just a few hypothetical scenarios that outline the shape of an actual Liberty, supported by the creator of the Zeitgeist of Liberty that was still hanging in the air when America was founded. (Thomas Burke)

The author goes out of his way to offend both the left and the right in his conclusions, and in my opinion, it’s quite a clever frickin’ piece. What would you frame Liberty as instead? I can understand being anti-abortion, but consenting adults’ sexual rights I have issues taking away. And I love God, but I’m no fan of Christian Dominionism in the government.

You might also appreciate The Book of Why. If I understand what you’re implying, it’s that the left has done a successful cultural intervention that has made their views go more viral, kind of a fake it until you make it type deal. This is the math behind interventions and counterfactuals “what ifs”. I do believe the Zeitgeist of gay sex has found purchase, particularly with girls, in the past 10 years (but girls are beautiful, that’s not particularly shocking), but I haven’t found the same to be true of men. Maybe it’s because I’m an ugly dude and nobody wants to hit on me lol. Also, no doubt, women and minorities still want equal rights. And I’m fine with that.

The neat thing about the math of interventions and counterfactuals is we can know, mathematically, what causes what in the near future, and will not be constrained by our weak logic and intuition.

(Another interesting mathy area is IRL (inverse reinforcement learning), which can uncover true motives and rewards. It’s an offshoot of the field of active AI, but can apply to any decision making entity- a rat, a human, a company. I personally believe the GOP party is scamming its constituents pretty hard. Covering greedy corrupt motives with the language of another cause. If that is the case, this is the kind of algorithmic technique that could lay that bare.)

And other elements of the left, culturally, aren’t really that viral. No one loves abortion. I personally find the practice of using it as a first and last measure of birth control to be abhorrent, like wear a condom, get a shot, get an IUD, do something. (pull out!)

But I think making it illegal brings a whole host of evils alongside it, too. And just means the whole thing will go underground, and become more damaging to its survivors.

I’m going to stop there. Sorry for the novel.

u/RockyMcNuts · 2 pointsr/askscience

At risk of oversimplifying, given sufficient high-quality data, correlation implies causation SOMEWHERE.

But correlation by itself doesn't tell you the direction of causation, or even if one variable causes the other. Running the A.C. may be correlated to buying ice cream but one may not cause the other, they may both be caused by e.g. hot weather.

Correlation is necessary, but not sufficient. You also need a good theory and a good experimental design to test the theory.

So, do a random controlled trial, give half the subjects an intervention and observe the results. Since the only thing that determined the group assignment is chance, and the only difference between groups is the intervention, one can reasonably say that any statistically significant difference is due to the intervention.

All other causal paths are severed by the random selection, so the intervention must be the cause. As Sherlock Holmes says, once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth.

You may find the intervention of running the A.C. causes a reduction in consumption of ice cream despite positive correlation. (Simpson's paradox https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/fb/Simpsons_paradox_-_animation.gif/440px-Simpsons_paradox_-_animation.gif)

In many cases, like smoking, you cannot randomly assign people to groups, tell one group to smoke, and follow them for 30 years. But if you can theoretically derive all the plausible causal paths and control for them with a good experimental design, you can empirically test causality.

May I recommend "The Book of Why" by Judea Pearl? https://www.amazon.com/Book-Why-Science-Cause-Effect/dp/046509760X

u/amazon-converter-bot · 1 pointr/FreeEBOOKS

Here are all the local Amazon links I could find:













Beep bloop. I'm a bot to convert Amazon ebook links to local Amazon sites.
I currently look here: amazon.com, amazon.co.uk, amazon.ca, amazon.com.au, amazon.in, amazon.com.mx, amazon.de, amazon.it, amazon.es, amazon.com.br, amazon.nl, amazon.co.jp, amazon.fr, if you would like your local version of Amazon adding please contact my creator.

u/nckmiz · 1 pointr/IOPsychology

Not finished with it yet, but so far Judea Pearl’s the Book of Why is really good too. His research and philosophy is extremely unique IMO bec
ause he is a computer scientist by training educated in Machine and deep learning, but a lot of his work has focused on understanding causality. The book discusses why causality is so important and the need for us to solve that problem before we can get computers to pass the Turing Test. IMO extremely relevant to I/Os attempting to blend theory with AI.


u/MyDogFanny · 1 pointr/DebateAnAtheist

I just started reading this book, The Book of Why by Judea Pearl.

\> Pearl's work enables us to know not just whether one thing causes another: it lets us explore the world that is and the worlds that could have been. It shows us the essence of human thought and key to artificial intelligence. Anyone who wants to understand either needs The Book of Why.

I first heard about him from a Sam Harris interview. There are a few talks by Pearl on youtube also.

Ultimately the answer is "We don't know. Therefore God exists." LOL. Sorry. Bad joke.

There does seem to be a difference between the quantum level and our macro or "emergent" level where we live and think. At least that is what we experience.

\> I meant a reason as in if it happened in any other way it potentially wouldn't be better than it is right now.

We seem to be constrained by the arrow of time if we are wanting to change the past. Could past events have been different than they were? I don't think so. I think they are what they are (they were what they were). We cannot change them from our position today and we could not have changed them from our position in the past.

u/IDoCompNeuro · 5 pointsr/MachineLearning

To add to the suggestions from others, check out Judea Pearl's work summarized nicely for a general audience in his recent book:

The Book of Why: The New Science of Cause and Effect https://www.amazon.com/dp/046509760X/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_i_lQsEDbX13385S

He also has a textbook that's more technical.

u/diisiqueira · 1 pointr/Livros

Terminei de ler o Clean Code e o The Choose Yourself Guide To Wealth, agora comecei a ler o The Go Programming Language. Queria ler alguma aventura, mas pra ser sincero dei uma procurada por cima e nenhum título atual realmente me chamou a atenção.

u/MENDACIOUS_RACIST · 5 pointsr/SubredditDrama

The vexing thing is while they may not believe in taxes, they believe in this sort of malarky

And the law of averages means there will always be just enough people who luck out and profit while pursuing this sort of nonsense strategy to attract more desperate, gullible people. (See: the evergreen industry of daytrading "strategy")