4 ms·
yep, immediately thought of that too. PG writes VERY good stuff most of the time and is very smart about a lot of things, but when he strays into areas in which
by admoin 19y ago
yep, immediately thought of that too. PG writes VERY good stuff most of the time and is very smart about a lot of things, but when he strays into areas in which he is not well versed (the unions essay comes to mind), he ends up writing pieces with obvious holes.
- pg 19y agoDo you have any specific holes you could point to as examples?
- admoin 19y agoI read the union essay a while ago, but your failure to sufficiently consider risk-aversion in this one was a major hole. I don't mean to really criticize that much, you write consistently great stuff.
- pg 19y agohttp://news.ycombinator.com/edit?id=35171 http://news.ycombinator.com/edit?id=35171
- admoin 19y agoThat works, except then I guess the hole was not making it clear enough that you were talking about utility rather than expected value. The problem with your response, and the reason that I don't really see it as a good explanation, is that your basic principle is far less useful if it requires the user to calculate their expected utility.
- pg 19y agoIn practice it's not hard, because nearly all founders' utility functions are practically step functions.