3 ms·
If you use a technique that cuts a lot of people, but cuts more bad people than good people, you'll still end up with plenty of good people. The difference in
by BearGoesChirp 9y ago
If you use a technique that cuts a lot of people, but cuts more bad people than good people, you'll still end up with plenty of good people. The difference in comparison isn't between the average and the good person who was cut, but between the good person who was cut and the good person who wasn't cut. What is the chance of the heuristic cutting someone 10% better than the best person not cut?
- Balgair 9y agoBTW, this is a 'solved' problem: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secretary_problem https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secretary_problem
- jazzdev 9y agoThe optimal solution only picks the best candidate 37% of the time.
- Balgair 9y agoThat was not my reading of it. To me, given a large enough pool (~20+), you can statistically assume you'll get a top 10% candidate with this method, at least that is what i read. Still, this method at least has some structure to it. As opposed to the anecdotes that the rest of the thread is.