Hacker News Reader

Comment by aerovistae | Hacker News Reader

These analysts always make me laugh. Their "insights" are just random guesses picked out of a hat. "Maybe THIS will happen! Then again, maybe it won't!" And they're proved wrong, over and over and over, but they keep at it. What are their credentials? Why are these people writing headlines?

View on HN

Analysts, meteorologists, and software estimates are mostly well-meaning but never to be completely trusted.

Well said.

At least meteorology is based upon solid, "predictable" science instead of buzzword bingo speak from stock analysts and 90% of IT consultants ;)

while I get and agree with your point, I find many meteorologists have about the same accuracy of prediction as the other two groups.

Most meteorologists gather their data from the same place, the National Weather Service. All they do is basically create pretty charts around it and put on a suit.

Depends on the area and timeframe. If you look areas where there are lots of sensors around - say Europe, forecast for next 2 weeks will be very accurate.

If you are looking at the ocean, where sensors are only placed every 500KM - your accuracy will be very low.

Source: I sail boats and study forecasts occasionally.

People keep clicking the links

It really seems like the best thing a company could do for its share price is conspire with analysts so they have consistently low expectations, and then it can constantly "beat analysts' expectations" which is apparently how most people value companies.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com