4 ms·
Why would you ever choose to penalize the actual closest driver (gamed algorithm aside)? It seems like a completely reasonable algorithm. In theory, the algorit
by mypalmike 6y ago
Why would you ever choose to penalize the actual closest driver (gamed algorithm aside)? It seems like a completely reasonable algorithm. In theory, the algorithm sends the closest driver away on a delivery, moving the next closest to the front of an implicit queue.
It would be nice to have perfect knowledge beforehand of how an otherwise reasonable algorithm will be gamed once it's out in the wild.
- Talanes 6y agoThis is such an obvious way to game the system though, if they had put literally any effort into trying to make a system that can't be abused, they would have caught it. Either the system wasn't thought through, or it was thought through by someone with no understanding of how groups of people behave.
- mypalmike 6y agoIt's obvious that people will hang phones from trees? The reason you're reading this on hn today is specifically because it is novel group behavior.
- throwawaynothx 6y agoNa he just means when developing something the first thing you try to do is think how can this be abused. By handing out jobs to the closest device and not checking the last job that device received is poor programming.
- mola 6y agoIf there's an algorithm in charge of optimizing, it will be gamed. If there's a single algorithm controlling a large population, it'll be catastrophically gamed.
- piva00 6y agoThere is a more general rule than that, I would tie that to Goodhart's law/adage "when a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a good measure". It's similar here, when an algorithm is in charge of optimisation it has its heuristics, they will be gamed as they are measures that became a target.