[dead]
Pareto Front
51–60 of 116 posts
Re: Pareto Front
#52At $JOB, I use the Pareto frontier all the time.
If one option is at least as good on every relevant dimension and better on one, just pick it. That's not really a trade-off, and it shouldn't need escalation. Eg, if two SaaS tools cost the same and have similar support, but one fits your use case better, you choose that one. Otherwise, you just suck at your job!
The interesting decisions only start once you're already on the frontier, where getting more of one thing means giving up something else. If the better tool costs 50% more, now you're trading capability against cost, and that may need sign-off.
Basically, everyone should be able to get to the frontier on their own. Coordination and arbitration at higher levels of the org / between different departments should happen on the frontier, where the trade-offs involve several people or teams.
Re: Pareto Front
#53I’m sadly twitchy when I hear “Pareto” - having endured numerous middle managers suggesting they can deliver 80% of the scope in 20% of the time (unrelated to the frontier topic here). Do that at each level of an org and the nonsense multiples rapidly.
The 80/20 “rule,” as far as I know, is meant to be descriptive after the fact. It can’t be used as a planning assumption. To be fair to those managers, they don’t really mean to be rigorous. They are just trying to justify cutting scope.
Re: Pareto Front
#54I’m sadly twitchy when I hear “Pareto” - having endured numerous middle managers suggesting they can deliver 80% of the scope in 20% of the time (unrelated to the frontier topic here). Do that at each level of an org and the nonsense multiples rapidly. The 80/20 “rule,” as far as I know, is meant to be descriptive after the fact. It can’t be used as a planning assumption. To be fair to those managers, they don’t real…
Managers trying to justify _cutting_ scope...
Is your planet accepting immigrants? I think I'd like it there
Re: Pareto Front
#55I have a weightlifting spreadsheet with weight on the vertical axis and reps on the horizontal axis. The value of each cell is the estimated 1 rep max if I accomplish that lift. In theory if my e1RM is 100kg then I can lift any permutation of (weight,reps) that have the same e1RM. This is akin to knowing Pareto Frontier of my current strength. I use conditional formatting to color cells according to the probability t…
This is a cool way to gamify weightlifting. Cheers!
Indeed, GP should take a spin at turning into an app. Could be worthwhile to have Claude take a first stab at a MVP.
If pursued, good luck!
Re: Pareto Front
#56Earlier quoted context omitted.
Basically, prioritization. It’s really that simple. Eschew obfuscation.
Almost the complete opposite of prioritisation. The Pareto points are where you sacrifice the least of anything to get the most of everything. There's the saying about buying computers. Good, Cheap, Fast, pick any two. That's where you would prioritise. If someone makes something that better, cheaper, and faster, or even pretty close to the best on two of those and clearly better on the other. It's a Pareto point. Ov…
I’m not sure how that’s the opposite of prioritizing, but if I’m wrong, then I’ll happily admit it.
We choose our items/workflows/technologies/whatever, so we get the best/most efficient/most effective/whatever, across the widest possible set.
Sounds like prioritizing, to me, but I’m just a dumb hick, so I suppose I can be wrong.
Re: Pareto Front
#57You can see the Pareto Frontier well in DeepSWE's chart here - https://deepswe.datacurve.ai/ ChatGPT 5.6 Luna on the right (cheaper) cover most of the frontier, with a point for Deepseek flash, and higher performance overlapping heavily between 5.6 Sol and Fable. That DeepSeek point will probably move back towards Luna as deepseek announced a "significant" price increase coming to their API [1], which kind of demonst…
I've been wondering if OpenAI make Luna artificially cheap to get people into their eco system.
I think it's great and hope the price can stay the same.
Re: Pareto Front
#58[dead]
Re: Pareto Front
#59Earlier quoted context omitted.
I thought it was some sort of Italian activism group. "The Pareto Front today claimed responsiblity for...."
...20% of the attacks causing 80% of the casualties?
No!! That is the Front of Pareto[1], a totally different group. Our Pareto Front only causes 20% of the casualties.
[1] - http://montypython.50webs.com/scripts/Life_of_Brian/8.htm
Re: Pareto Front
#60Earlier quoted context omitted.
Almost the complete opposite of prioritisation. The Pareto points are where you sacrifice the least of anything to get the most of everything. There's the saying about buying computers. Good, Cheap, Fast, pick any two. That's where you would prioritise. If someone makes something that better, cheaper, and faster, or even pretty close to the best on two of those and clearly better on the other. It's a Pareto point. Ov…
I’m not sure how that’s the opposite of prioritizing, but if I’m wrong, then I’ll happily admit it. We choose our items/workflows/technologies/whatever, so we get the best/most efficient/most effective/whatever, across the widest possible set. Sounds like prioritizing, to me, but I’m just a dumb hick, so I suppose I can be wrong.
Prioritising is when you choose something over another. A drag racer prioritises time to travel a quarter mile.
Going for the Pareto is when you elect not to prioritise. It is explicitly deciding to not choose one property over another ant to keep everything as much as you can.