Great Summary: I tried reading the book, but they spent so much time talking about the history of the problem I lost interest.
Boyfriend says to his girlfriend: If you want to marry me, find me more girlfriends to prove you are the best.Lmao
Now are we talking first dates You can't possibly learn enough about someone in one date so I'm unsure how going on 7 separate dates is getting you closer to finding the person of your dreamsAlso, what's the point of going out with someone you know even before going in that it's not going to work out Surely no one's that lonely and bored to just waste someone else's night like that. That's sad.This seems like the kind of dating advice that PHD students who haven't gotten laid in years give.
Don't interview me if you have no intention of hiring me.
now if you go to a job interview, make sure you don't belong in the 37 percent lmao
Key points:(1) 37% rules: reject 37% you sample and pick the next best one (highest probability of the pick the best one)(2) Onboarding algorithm: giving their workload until they cannot deliver the best result(3) Switching algorithm (Gittin Index): trying new thing increases our chance of finding the best
Awesome summary, thanks :)
Feel sorry for the first 7 who get the interview.
I kind of disagree with the second algorithm. However, it seems nice in the starting, it should increase the load using ratios only not by individual bits.Example: If my intern can handle 15 units of work in a unit time, I will increase it to 30. Then 60. But wait, he can't deal with 60. So, if I increase it by literal 1 unit increasing I am actually wasting my time on that intern too much. There it should not be increased by units, we must use ratio/fraction like we know that intern can not handle 200% so we will give him 130%, then 150% then 170% and if he fails we break down the work further. This might not be the best algorithm but is more effective on paper than the one in book.
The amount of Maths and technical stuff this video involves, I am scared already.
I got the point after watching 37% of this video.
What if you need to hire someone right away or your startup fails? What if when you fall in love with someone new they ALWAYS seem better than all the previous candidates? I feel like, for most cases, we have to account for so many of these rules-changing circumstances that the algorithms loose their value almost completely.
There's an 'algorithm' in the book which you didn't talk about: When to stop calling an old friend that constantly says he's busy.It suggests to just double the interval between requests. First, a week after another. After that, two weeks interval. After that, four week. And it goes on... Of course you naturally stops after a certain number.I actually liked that.
Loved the audiobook. Loved your video as well.
Greedy algorithms are ok for intra-machine and inter-machine processing, don't apply these heartless ways to deal with humans. Thanks for reviewing PG
Stupid book, stupid algorithms
Setting aside the efficacy of the 37% rule, doesn't it just seem unethical? Bring in 7 candidates who you KNOW you won't hire? Just waste their time? Or in the case of the guy trying to find a wife, you just string girls along - knowing you're going to break up with them before even giving them a chance to prove themselves as a good partner?And on the effectiveness: what if the best candidate is one of the first seven? You'll interview the rest of the pool, and nobody will meet the criteria for selection because nobody will outperform the entire group of the first seven people.
Got this on audiobook . Dont think Ill listen
if we buy the PDF package do we get the new ones when released?
Did you ever get copyright strike for anybof your videos
Thank you for an honest review!
I got disappointed on finding it a shallow pop talk on such a deep and technical book!!!(You could do much better with some more effort and vision. the goal of spending time to browse something is to learn something more on the top of the original source! )
Did he just read the first chapter?
Crazy shirt
I keep looking at your biceps, how can I focus on what you are saying?
Damn, I have so many books to read now. Thanks for all these recommendations!
So much blabbering - get the main points across quickly ...
I've had this on my wishlist for awhile now...guess I'll take the plunge. That shirt is awesome too!!
Thanks for the recommendation
Really enjoyed this review.I also really appreciated the Stumbling on Happiness" review too, particularly for your focus on the content but also for your ability to critically reflect on the aspects you didn't agree with. Thanks for sharing Looking forward to hopefully hearing more reviews in the future as it was your book reviews that originally brought me to your channel.
Air pods are gay crap compared to the jaybird x3's. Make a review on that instead.
Did you know you can start from any page in Wikipedia, keep clicking the first link on each page and you will always end up at philosophy?So you can score any article, e.g. the computer science article, by its "distance" from philosophy, or the number of iterations required of clickFirstLinkOnPage() to arrive at philosophy.I read Wikipedia a lot. Nothing better to do :(
Congrats on a 100k subs
I just finished reading this book! As a second-year computer science major, this book was challenging but heavily rewarding to complete. I agree with John that it is so accessible and entertaining and gives actual life advice. The last couple chapters on networking and game theory do get a little strung out, but it was worth reading through the whole book. This book has 51 pages of notes at the end; they did some very serious cognitive science research to complete this book.
My favorite was the section on TCP connections.
cool shirt
Should make a video of you burning that shirt haha
alright more book reviews! have to check this out.
congrats for 100k subscribers
I managed to get over his boring tone until he made that unpleasant joke about being old and worthless,
Google pay makes it simple to collect all your banking information to monitor your transactions to better predict and sell you what google wants and its partners
Computer science can help to make us more forgiving of our own limitations
You can't control outcome. As long as you have used the best process, you have done the best that you can. These are the concessions that we make when we are not rational, they are rational means
You fail most of the time (37%), but that's the best you can do optimal strategy
GOOD
He claims that if you were searching for 30 days, that you are ready to act after 11 days but what set that initial search time of 30 days? I don't think the 37% works for time like it does for searching through all options.
Try to pray lord shiva
A good book
should not have read this book. most boring book i ve ever read.
Tough Crowd
So if you gonna live for 70 years, you take 37% of your lifetime to make ultimate life roadmap,it should be around 26 years old
Deserves more views
3:29 Chapter 1 Optimal Shopping10:25 The Secretary Problem17:15 When to sell18:45 When to Park
nice
He sounds like Elon Musk that doesn't talk so slowly and has an accent.
So... She was not best option. I still have time.
Timestamps anyone
48:54 no es guchi
Only if i could understand the yt algorithm better
What ancient computer processor had L2 cache off-chip?
Overall, through many visits to casino slots expect to lose 80% of your money. If you can still have fun losing 80% than you are OK and good to go.
35:05 "we should actually expect to get steadily happier through life" lmaooooo good one
Is the 37% rule valid for unordered things? For example I've 10 candy samples and I've to select the best and I've time constraints. So randomly selecting 37% to evaluate and selecting the best Except those 37% group of sample
Wow, this is bad... Sorry, but this is knowledge normal people get in high-school, y'know... when they START dating, (as opposed to after finishing their PhD in the nerd's case, I'm guessing?) No one should be married before finishing college, so that's 8 YEARS a normal person has dated. If you don't know what you want from relationships after 8 years, you NEVER will... Math won't help you.
Just coating concepts people already intuitively live by with jargon and statistics. Pretentious and pointless.
So why does a 50% chance of rejection bring the chance of success to 25% from 37%?
Ted Ed brought me here
And then Tinder incorporated
you be clear sir what you want to do speak needed sir
do it out of body hard pill to swallow!!!