3 ms·
It would probably focus on measuring the degree to which individuals differ, assigning explanatory variables, and figuring out the theoretical maximum (as brain
by sennight 5y ago
It would probably focus on measuring the degree to which individuals differ, assigning explanatory variables, and figuring out the theoretical maximum (as brain chemistry sets a pretty hard limit). But that doesn't really matter, because we know that people can very easily be generalized - there is an entire industry devoted to it: advertising. Many years ago I had to design a process to pre-stage inventory based on expected demand - using historical data from a fairly inelastic customer base. It was spooky how accurately a Poisson distribution could predict long tailed events - but only after segmenting the customer base into something like 5 groups. This was for millions of people - 5 groups.
- mensetmanusman 5y agoMakes sense for consumer behavior since there are a finite set of purchase choices. Things like ethics and behavior choices are fuzzy though…
- sennight 5y ago> behavior choices I really wish this weren't the case, but "choice" isn't a thing - as far as anyone can tell. All the complexity on display in the world appears to be a result of feedback loops, it really doesn't take much to generate a continuous low interval stream of pseudo random feedback - predictable after enough observation. People who regularly purchase chunky peanut butter and cat litter have a significantly higher probability of driving a VW bug. That isn't the result of limited alternatives. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linear-feedback_shift_register https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linear-feedback_shift_register