Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Algorithms to Live By – The Computer Science of Human Decisions

blog.galowicz.de

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 60 posts

Re: Algorithms to Live By – The Computer Science of Human Decisions

#31

Post by Mezzie »

AmpsterMan wrote: post #16
Mezzie wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do the same. My other rule is that wherever I look for it when I've lost it is where it belongs. It causes a fair amount of friction with housemates, though. Have you figured out any way to alleviate that when it comes to areas used by multiple people?

In some sense you have a race condition. By taking the item and misplacing it, you've caused a deadlock. Solutions are kinda the same: have a copy of the item for every person that might use it, or be strict about freeing all locked resources.

In my case the problem is that I need things to be where they make sense for my brain or I lose them, and my sister (who I live with) has the type of anxiety that manifests as needing control over and having a 'tidy' space. So it does end up in a deadlock because she wants things all nice and 'organized' but then I can't see them and have no idea where they are.

Re: Algorithms to Live By – The Computer Science of Human Decisions

#32

Post by bumby »

O__________O wrote: post #28

Optimal Stopping Problem always confused me, since it seems to assume you’re not aware of a meaningful measure of what an optimal match would be, but aware of what the optimal set of potential matches is. For example, say there’s a goose looking for a mate and they only look at geese of the opposite sex, but in fact, that specific goose’s optimal mate type is a black swan. Maybe it’s just me, but at the point you’re…

I think they address this in a discussion about lacking full information.

"We don't have an objective or preexisting sense of what makes for a good or bad applicant; moreover, when we compare two of them we know which of the two is better, but not by how much." (p. 18)

They then go on to explain stopping thresholds in the cases when you do have full information.

Re: Algorithms to Live By – The Computer Science of Human Decisions

#34

Post by haffi112 »

chrisweekly wrote: post #17

ATLB is such an interesting and worthwhile book. My note-taking skills have improved a lot since I first read it maybe 6 or 7 years ago... def time to revisit.

I also recommend other books by Brian Christan, especially the Alignment Problem.

Re: Algorithms to Live By – The Computer Science of Human Decisions

#35

Post by leetcodesucks »

matsemann wrote: post #23
shubhamjain wrote: post #14

> Other animal behavior also evokes TCP flow control, with its characteristic sawtooth. Squirrels and pigeons going after human food scraps will creep forward a step at a time, occasionally leap back, then steadily creep forward again. > Caching gives us the language to understand what’s happening. We say “brain fart” when we should really say “cache miss”. Sorry, but how can anyone find this book insightful? Doesn't…

This isn't a self-help book, so your whole big rant misses the mark.

[dead]

Re: Algorithms to Live By – The Computer Science of Human Decisions

#36

Post by fierro »

nighthawk454 wrote: post #30
O__________O wrote: post #28

Optimal Stopping Problem always confused me, since it seems to assume you’re not aware of a meaningful measure of what an optimal match would be, but aware of what the optimal set of potential matches is. For example, say there’s a goose looking for a mate and they only look at geese of the opposite sex, but in fact, that specific goose’s optimal mate type is a black swan. Maybe it’s just me, but at the point you’re…

It's not about optimal matches at all - it's about when to stop looking. The assumption is you don't known the set of potential matches, or the order they come in, or anything really. But there is a deadline for the decision (or a maximum number of attempts). So how to balance making attempts to gather information with committing to a final decision so you don't run out of time? All else being equal, the rule is 1/e.…

exactly. The optimal stopping solution maximizes the probability you find the best candidate. That probability ends up being quite low, unfortunately.

Re: Algorithms to Live By – The Computer Science of Human Decisions

#38

Post by shaftoe444 »

Interesting article, I would recommend also reading Russ Robert's 'Wild Problems', who makes the case that algorithms are a bad fit for many of life's big decisions.

Podcast and transcript on it here. https://www.econtalk.org/russ-roberts-and-mike-munger-on-wil...

Post reply on HN