pareto   272

« earlier    

Reasoning From First Principles: The Dumbest Thing Smart People Do
Most middle-class Americans at least act as if:
- Exactly four years of higher education is precisely the right level of training for the overwhelming majority of good careers.
- You should spend most of your waking hours most days of the week for the previous twelve+ years preparing for those four years. In your free time, be sure to do the kinds of things guidance counselors think are impressive; we as a society know that these people are the best arbiters of arete.
- Forty hours per week is exactly how long it takes to be reasonably successful in most jobs.
- On the margin, the cost of paying for money management exceeds the cost of adverse selection from not paying for it.
- You will definitely learn important information about someone’s spousal qualifications in years two through five of dating them.
-Human beings need about 50% more square feet per capita than they did a generation or two ago, and you should probably buy rather than rent it.
- Books are very boring, but TV is interesting.

All of these sound kind of dumb when you write them out. Even if they’re arguably true, you’d expect a good argument. You can be a low-risk contrarian by just picking a handful of these, articulating an alternative — either a way to get 80% of the benefit at 20% of the cost, or a way to pay a higher cost to get massively more benefits — and then living it.[1]
techtariat  econotariat  unaffiliated  wonkish  org:med  thinking  skeleton  being-right  paying-rent  rationality  pareto  cost-benefit  arbitrage  spock  epistemic  contrarianism  finance  personal-finance  investing  stories  metameta  advice  metabuch  strategy  education  higher-ed  labor  sex  housing  tv  meta:reading  axioms  truth  worse-is-better/the-right-thing 
16 days ago by nhaliday
Ask HN: Learning modern web design and CSS | Hacker News
Ask HN: Best way to learn HTML and CSS for web design?: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11048409
Ask HN: How to learn design as a hacker?: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8182084

Ask HN: How to learn front-end beyond the basics?: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19468043
Ask HN: What is the best JavaScript stack for a beginner to learn?: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8780385
Free resources for learning full-stack web development: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13890114

Ask HN: What is essential reading for learning modern web development?: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14888251
Ask HN: A Syllabus for Modern Web Development?: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2184645

Ask HN: Modern day web development for someone who last did it 15 years ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20656411
hn  discussion  design  form-design  frontend  web  tutorial  links  recommendations  init  pareto  efficiency  minimum-viable  move-fast-(and-break-things)  advice  roadmap  multi  hacker  games  puzzles  learning  guide  dynamic  retention  DSL  working-stiff  q-n-a  javascript  frameworks  ecosystem  libraries  client-server  hci  ux  books  chart 
29 days ago by nhaliday
Estimating projects with power law completion times
With fat tail, I.e. power law, project times, late projects are likely to be even later,
powerlaw  pareto  law  cook  consulting  estimates  management  math  estimation  interesting  probability  project-management 
7 weeks ago by xer0x
Laurence Tratt: What Challenges and Trade-Offs do Optimising Compilers Face?
Summary
It's important to be realistic: most people don't care about program performance most of the time. Modern computers are so fast that most programs run fast enough even with very slow language implementations. In that sense, I agree with Daniel's premise: optimising compilers are often unimportant. But “often” is often unsatisfying, as it is here. Users find themselves transitioning from not caring at all about performance to suddenly really caring, often in the space of a single day.

This, to me, is where optimising compilers come into their own: they mean that even fewer people need care about program performance. And I don't mean that they get us from, say, 98 to 99 people out of 100 not needing to care: it's probably more like going from 80 to 99 people out of 100 not needing to care. This is, I suspect, more significant than it seems: it means that many people can go through an entire career without worrying about performance. Martin Berger reminded me of A N Whitehead’s wonderful line that “civilization advances by extending the number of important operations which we can perform without thinking about them” and this seems a classic example of that at work. Even better, optimising compilers are widely tested and thus generally much more reliable than the equivalent optimisations performed manually.

But I think that those of us who work on optimising compilers need to be honest with ourselves, and with users, about what performance improvement one can expect to see on a typical program. We have a tendency to pick the maximum possible improvement and talk about it as if it's the mean, when there's often a huge difference between the two. There are many good reasons for that gap, and I hope in this blog post I've at least made you think about some of the challenges and trade-offs that optimising compilers are subject to.

[1]
Most readers will be familiar with Knuth’s quip that “premature optimisation is the root of all evil.” However, I doubt that any of us have any real idea what proportion of time is spent in the average part of the average program. In such cases, I tend to assume that Pareto’s principle won't be far too wrong (i.e. that 80% of execution time is spent in 20% of code). In 1971 a study by Knuth and others of Fortran programs, found that 50% of execution time was spent in 4% of code. I don't know of modern equivalents of this study, and for them to be truly useful, they'd have to be rather big. If anyone knows of something along these lines, please let me know!
techtariat  programming  compilers  performance  tradeoffs  cost-benefit  engineering  yak-shaving  pareto  plt  c(pp)  rust  golang  trivia  data  objektbuch  street-fighting  estimate  distribution  pro-rata 
july 2019 by nhaliday
What happens when everyone in a room keeps giving dollars to random others? • Decision Science News
Annie Duke:
<p>When we were giving a talk at the Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science at Northwestern we met Uri Wilensky, who shared with us a simulation he likes to assign.
<p>Imagine a room full of 100 people with 100 dollars each. With every tick of the clock, every person with money gives a dollar to one randomly chosen other person. After some time progresses, how will the money be distributed?</p>

If on quick reflection you thought “more or less equally”, you are not alone. I asked 5 super-smart PhDs this question and they all had the same initial intuition.

How does the distribution look? Play the movie above to see. [You'll have to click through; the video doesn't have an embed.] Here’s how it works.

The movie shows 5,000 clock ticks in less than a minute.

The Y axis shows the number of dollars each person has. It starts at 45 dollars each.

On the x-axis we have 45 people.

The red bars show the wealth of each person at each tick of the clock.

The blue bars are the same as red bars, but sorted to show how wealth is distributed. The rightmost blue bar is the height of the highest red bar, and so on down.

Don’t believe it? Play with R and tidyverse and gganimate code yourself.

Inequality can arise from seemingly innocuous policies — you need to keep an eye on it.</p>

Ah, hello, Mr Pareto. The penthouse suite as usual? (From Decision Science News, a once-weekly signup newsletter.) There's more discussion <a href="https://quomodocumque.wordpress.com/2017/06/27/when-random-people-give-money-to-random-other-people/">here</a>.
economics  simulation  statistics  inequality  pareto 
october 2018 by charlesarthur
(PDF) Goodbye Pareto Principle, Hello Long Tail: The Effect of Search Costs on the Concentration of Product Sales
Many markets have historically been dominated by a small number of best-selling products. The Pareto principle, also known as the 80/20 rule, describes this common pattern of sales concentration. However, information technology in general and Internet markets in particular have the potential to substantially increase the collective share of niche products, thereby creating a longer tail in the distribution of sales. This paper investigates the Internet's "long tail" phenomenon. By analyzing data collected from a multichannel retailer, it provides empirical evidence that the Internet channel exhibits a significantly less concentrated sales distribution when compared with traditional channels. Previous explanations for this result have focused on differences in product availability between channels. However, we demonstrate that the result survives even when the Internet and traditional channels share exactly the same product availability and prices. Instead, we find that consumers' usage of Internet search and discovery tools, such as recommendation engines, are associated with an increase the share of niche products. We conclude that the Internet's long tail is not solely due to the increase in product selection but may also partly reflect lower search costs on the Internet. If the relationships we uncover persist, the underlying trends in technology portend an ongoing shift in the distribution of product sales. This paper was accepted by Ramayya Krishnan, information systems.
longtail  pareto  8020 
october 2018 by bartcelona

« earlier    

related tags

1percent  20/60  20  2013  2017  2018  5  80/20  80/20rule  80-20  80  8020  acm  adam  advantage  advertising  advice  ai  akrasia  aksjenorge  aksjespareklubb  alcohol  altruism  analysis  analytics  anthropology  arbitrage  architecture  article  atoms  attaq  august  automation  axelrod  axioms  backup  bar  behavioral-gen  being-right  best-practices  biodet  biophysical-econ  bipartisanship  black-swan  blog  bobby  books  bootstraps  broad-econ  business  byronsharp  c(pp)  caching  cardinal  career  carma  caroline  cato  charles-stross  chart  check  checking  checklists  choice  class  client-server  cohesion  coink  collaboration  coming-apart  commentary  commute  comparison  compensation  compilers  complexity  computing  concept  conceptual-vocab  conservative  consulting  context  contrarianism  control  cook  cooperate-defect  coordination  correlation  cost-benefit  counterfactual  cracker-econ  crampton  crime  criminology  criticism  critique  cumulative  current-events  daniel  data-science  data  dataviz  dba  debate  decision-making  degrees-of-freedom  denmark  descriptive  design  diagram  dignity  dilemma  discipline  discussion  disease  distribution  diversity  dorthea  dragvoll  dsl  dynamic  econ  econnect  economics  economy  econotariat  ecosystem  education  effective-altruism  efficiency  efficient  elite  email  engineering  epidemiology  epistemic  equilibrium  eric  essay  estimate  estimates  estimation  ethics  europe  evolutionary  excel  excellence  existence  explanans  exposition  externalities  facebook  fadder  fb  fellowship  fermi  finance  fishbone  fn  focus  fonde  form-design  forsvaret  frameworks  freedom  frontend  fundraising  futures  galea  game  games  garett-jones  gender  generalisation  gift  golang  government  gowers  gpd  graph  green  growth-econ  gt-101  gtd  guide  gurri  habit  hacker  hap-analysis  happiness  hbr  hci  health  healthcare  heidi  henning  heroes  higher-ed  hilde  histogram  history  hive-mind  hn  housing  hsu  human-capital  ia  ibok  idk  ifttt  iidness  impact  individual  individualism-collectivism  industrial-org  inequality  info-econ  init  insurance  intellectual  intelligence  interesting  interests  internet  intricacy  invariance  invest  investing  investment  iq  ishikawa  james  jargon  javascript  jobs  justice  kano  karl  karma  kristian  krystian  labor  latency  law  learn  learning  libertarianism  liberty  libraries  lifehacker  lifehacks  lifeskills  line  links  list  local-global  long-short-run  long_tail  longtail  low-hanging  loyalty  ludvigsen  magnitude  management  marginal  market-power  marketing  markets  markmanson  math  mathtariat  may  measurement  medicine  meta:prediction  meta:reading  metabuch  metameta  method  methodology  metrics  michaelschrage  micro  microfoundations  minimum-viable  mixer  models  money  mood-affiliation  morality  move-fast-(and-break-things)  multi  mutual  myy  n-factor  nash  national  nb  neighborhood  neptus  nibble  nis  nitty-gritty  nonlinearity  nordic  nordnet  ntnu  null-result  obesity  objective-measure  objektbuch  occam  områdesekretariat  opinion  optimal  optimality  optimism  optimization  optimizing  ordered  ordinal  org  org:bleg  org:med  org:nat  org:ngo  organization  organizer  organizing  oscar  paretoprinciple  patents  paying-rent  pdf  performance  personal-finance  personal  planning  plt  policy  polisci  political-econ  politics  positivity  power-law  powerlaw  prediction  preferences  principle  principles  priorities  prioritization  prioritizing  priority  prisoners  pro-rata  probability  problem  process  procrastination  productivity  programming  project-management  properties  psychology  psychometrics  public-goodish  public-health  putnam-like  puzzles  python  q-n-a  quality  quotes  race  racketfest  random  ranked  rationality  ratty  readitlater  recommendations  red-queen  reddit  redistribution  reference  regression-to-mean  regulation  reinforcement  rent-seeking  requirements  research  respect  responsible  retention  retrospective  revealed-preference  review  roadmap  roots  rule  rust  s-factor  samfundet  sampling-bias  scale  scatter  schaeffer  schelling  scitariat  search  security  self-control  set  sex  sharp  sheet  signal-noise  signaling  signum  simulation  skage  skeleton  slavery  slides  slippery-slope  snowball  social-capital  social-psych  socialfabric  society  sociology  software  specialization  spock  sql  squasheria  stackex  stamina  statistics  stats  storage  stories  strategy  stratification  street-fighting  study  stylized-facts  success  summary  supply-demand  synne  systems  tableau  tails  taxation  taxes  technocracy  techtariat  tesla  testing  th  the-monster  theory  thinking  time  top-n  tore  trade  tradeoffs  tribalism  trivia  trust  truth  tutorial  tv  ui  uka  umlaut  un  unaffiliated  unintended-consequences  unknown-unknowns  usa  utilitarianism  ux  values  variance-components  vcs  viktor  vilfredo  water  wealth-of-nations  wealth  web  webapp  webdesign  weirdness  welfare-state  welfare  white-paper  wiki  winner-take-all  winnertakesall  wonkish  workflow  working-stiff  world  worrydream  worse-is-better/the-right-thing  yak-shaving  zero-positive-sum  zipf  🌞  🎩  🤖  🦉 

Copy this bookmark:



description:


tags: