4 ms·
To blindly assume patterns such as "80/20" hold everywhere would be foolish - rather, it is better to empirically verify them first in each case (as done by the
by parhurs 9y ago
To blindly assume patterns such as "80/20" hold everywhere would be foolish - rather, it is better to empirically verify them first in each case (as done by the article). Further, I wonder what makes you think the writer is surprised in the least...
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- xenihn 9y ago>To blindly assume patterns such as "80/20" hold everywhere would be foolish I see 80/20 EVERYWHERE now. It's hard for me to think of things where it isn't applicable. Maybe I'm just going crazy.
- joelrunyon 9y agoI don't think it's foolish. When it shows up as often it does, it's smart to see if it applies there. You can verify it, but it seems like a smart hypothesis to start with rather than assuming the inverse.
- exolymph 9y agoThe point of heuristics is not that they apply 100% of the time, but that they're correct more often than they're not.
- rytill 9y agoTo a point... but it's so prolific that you should be testing to falsify it most of the time.