"intimate with the cosmetic details, but are clueless about the subject"

Como é que eu não posso gostar de Nassim Taleb?

"I would seek the butcher as a third option if my choice was between two doctors who looked like doctors. Why? Simply the one who doesn’t look the part, conditional of having made a (sort of) successful career in his profession, had to have much to overcome in terms of perception. And if we are lucky enough to have people who do not look the part, it is thanks to the presence of some skin in the game, the contact with reality that filters out incompetence, as reality is blind to looks.
.
When the results come from dealing directly with reality rather than through the agency of commentators, image matters less, even if it correlates to skills. But image matters quite a bit when there is hierarchy and standardized “job evaluation”. Consider the chief executive officers of corporations: they not just look the part, but they even look the same. And, worse, when you listen to them talk, they will sound the same, down to the same vocabulary and metaphors. But that’s their jobs: as I keep reminding the reader, counter to the common belief, executives are different from entrepreneurs and are supposed to look like actors.
.
Now there may be some correlation between looks and skills; but conditional on having had some success in spite of not looking the part is potent, even crucial, information."

Como não pensar logo na procissão de membros da tríade (recomendo a leitura da série desde o número I) que costumamos sovar aqui periodicamente?

"In any type of activity or business divorced from the direct filter of skin in the game, the great majority of people know the jargon, play the part, are intimate with the cosmetic details, but are clueless about the subject." [Moi ici: Olha lembrei-me de Frasquilho]

O Cortes não vai gostar desta:

"Some rules. People who have always operated without skin in the game (or without their skin in the right game) seek the complicated, centralized, and avoid the simple like the pest. Practitioners on the other hand have opposite instincts, looking for the simplest heuristics.
.
People who are bred, selected, and compensated to find complicated solutions do not have an incentive to implement simplified ones
...
In other words, Many problems in society come from the interventionism of people who sell complicated solutions because that’s what their position and training invites them to do. There is absolutely no gain for someone in such a position to propose something simple: you are rewarded for perception not results. They pay no price for the side effects that grow nonlinearly with such complications."