Mr. Montier looked at how well a wide variety of simple models in many non-financial fields, ranging from medicine to criminal recidivism, worked. In nearly every instance, the models outperformed the experts.

For instance, he pointed to research by Leli and Filskov on diagnosing brain damage. For this purpose a model was developed that correctly identified 83 per cent of new cases, whereas professionals working from the same data got it right only 63 per cent of the time.

Thankfully, when you arm the pros with the model their performance improved. But here comes the kicker: They still only managed to get it right 75 per cent of the time. Yup, despite knowing the model's results, they failed to match it, let alone beat it.

my view is that machines beat humans on a day to day granular decision hands on

when does a human might do better is the big thing, in the huge thing in the one in a life time event. I sold futures when i saw that the World Trade center fire was caused by a plane on purpose. That was a I opener, sell sell sell .

a few man can catch a whale in Açores but to fish small fish you need a scanner and technology. On a everyday life machines are much better.