4 ms·
This, and the original link, base this concept on the idea that the task being monitored is subject to random chance. But the original link is talking about an
by turc1656 9y ago
This, and the original link, base this concept on the idea that the task being monitored is subject to random chance. But the original link is talking about an act that requires skill and something that a person is trained for. So the analogy of the coin toss doesn't make sense to me, nor does the original link.
It's like saying that just because I was able to parallel park successfully this time in one maneuver without hitting the curb or either of the cars in front or behind me that I have some sort of increased chance of not being successful the next time. That seems kind of absurd, doesn't it?
- ballenf 9y agoDon't equate things that aren't 50-50 with not having a degree of chance. Parallel parking and aerial maneuvers are not devoid of chance playing a role in success. The impact of chance does decrease with skill, but skill doesn't remove the element of chance. So the coin is an extreme example, not an irrelevant example.
- KirinDave 9y agoOne of the most pervasive myths we humans cling to is the idea of agency; that our skill and will an overcome random chance. While we might be able to undertake methodologies that skew chance distributions in our favor, everything around us is a game of probability we can only gently influence. Methods are MUCH more important for a career than any individual execution.