431–440 of 458 posts
> I talked about the need for proper QA. About thoroughly testing my changes. About taking the time to make sure the job gets done right. Oh good, a bunch of useless platitudes.
> I talked about the need for proper QA. About thoroughly testing my changes. About taking the time to make sure the job gets done right. Oh good, a bunch of useless platitudes.
Good god, this should be taught in high school.
kindness doesnt automatically emerge to replace a lack of negative outcome.
"My father didnt hit me with his belt" is not kindness. "My boss didnt fire me" is not kindness.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, and that makes "being kind" a lot harder. Many people reading the article think of a nice person that humbly tries their best but makes a bad mistake. But what if they're a hugely over-confident asshole? I mean, not everyone likes everyone, so when someone you don't like to begin with is arrogant, you might easily label them as an asshole. I think the deeper lesson of the article is not to consider other people…
>But what if they're a hugely over-confident asshole? Then they have absolutely no business working on a team effort. They never should have been hired in the first place.
Of course, there are genuinely poisonous people, and I agree on your points with regard to them.
When he returned to the air field, Bob Hoover walked over to the man who had nearly caused his death and, according to the California Fullerton News-Tribune, said: “There isn’t a man alive who hasn’t made a mistake. But I’m positive you’ll never make this mistake again. That’s why I want to make sure that you’re the only one to refuel my plane tomorrow. I won’t let anyone else on the field touch it.”
There are two schools of thought, especially in stock trading. 1) Reversion to the mean. This is what the above person believes and that this likely won't happen again. 2) Indication of a trend. The pilot is actually incompetent, and this will happen more frequently with this pilot than an average pilot.
I think more appropriate in this context is learning though. And I would suggest here multi-armed bandits (with every arm representing a pilot).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-armed_bandit
There is tradeoff between exploration and exploitation that has to be made.
The goal in this case corresponds to a particular type of bandit. It is to postpone death for as long as possible by pulling the right arm. I actually didn't find this type yet (a mortal multi-armed bandit has a birth-death process of the arms themselves).
Edit: This is only about the learning process on the non-pilot side, as one of the other commentators already articulated.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And my own darn fault for using platform Y from team X that would release a security update on a Friday. Yes, fix it. But if this isn't a one-off, get off of platform Y.
Timezones can make it so. It's not necessarily their fault.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I know you're probably not implying regression to the mean is causational, but that was my initial reading so I want to clarify for those who may not be familiar with the concept. Regression to the mean is simply that any given datapoint is most likely to be the mean, or close to it. This means that any exceptional data point,up or down, can be expected to be followed up by the mean. The example of this being misinte…
Yeah, I always make an example with coin flips to show how this is true.... lets say heads is success and tails is failure. Flip 100 coins. Take the ones that 'failed' (landed tails) and scold them. Flip them again. Half improved! Praise the ones that got heads the first time. Flip them again. Half got worse :( Clearly, scolding is more effective than praising.