I also find this to be a very interesting remark and it reminds me of the saying that "the more you study something the less you seem to know". I think it gets at this idea that as you continue to deeply break down a subject, the easy questions almost always get answered which usually leads to deeper and more complex questions beyond the initial ones. This sense of newly found ignorance then creates a feedback loop to continue the progress and find the answers to the newer more complex questions. Overall this cycle between knowledge and ignorance is very powerful and helps push the scientific world forward.

I also find this very interesting. Mathematics is the foundation for how we model our universe and to hear that the math we use right now might be outdated is alarming. I wonder if these breakthroughs need to be entirely new foundations or can they just build on previous discoveries? The idea that machine learning will help us discover new ideas is amazing but also if we don’t understand them can they really be used or considered accurate?

The part of the discussion that I think would be most illuminating to non-quantitative readers is this idea of understanding risk and uncertainty and how that relates to the news. As we know, the new channels are fighting for attention and in order to increase eyeballs they usually use misleading titles or data because the crazier it looks, the more likely they are to lure someone in. I think regardless of how quantitative someone is, they can always think about the uncertainty of these news article predictions and understand that no matter what there’s always a chance that these numbers are misleading. I think this could help people take a step back and stop immediatly forming life decisions or actions based on a quick glimpse of a news title or graph.

I also find this very interesting, you'd think we'd have an idea of other man-made aircrafts so that we wouldn't make this mistake. Maybe its just our desire to find extraterrestrial intelligence that drives us to look for it in things that aren't extraterrestrial. This also reminds me of all the recent news on UFOs and the fact that the government is now confirming they exist. It really makes you question what this universe truly consists of and again it caters to our desire to find life outside of our own.

I also find this to be a very interesting application of behavioral economics. As we already know, the social media apps have influenced human behavior by constantly nudging or using notifications to spur activity. It would be interesting if the same applications could be applied to help people with personal finance decisions. Like providing notifications and reminders to save more or invest instead of only spending.

I also find the possible impacts of machine learning and AI on the public markets to be fascinating. These innovations could improve the profitability of specific firms/institutions that can afford their services. However, at the same time, the diffusion of the internet and instant access to information/data has started to give power back to individual investors. This dichotomy will be interesting to watch play out as the market continues to adapt to these new technologies. I think it's likely that the market will continue to become more volatile as the spread of information increases in speed and as more machines/algorithms continue to take a larger portion of market trades. These two together will contribute to even faster and more dramatic sell-offs and rallies.

I also found this to be a great question to ask. The modeling for climate change is incredibly important but so is the publics reception of said model. If the public isn't properly informed, then it doesn't matter how great the model is because the public won't respond in the right way.