Readit NewsThe basic strategy that works for me:
1. If I have an obvious skew in the distribution of cards I've been dealt, I can assume the common suit and hence the goal suit and try to buy the cards of that suit.
2. If the distribution of cards I have is more or less even, then I just save that round and try to make back the base cost.
The hard part has been trying to understand how to update my beliefs based on the trades being made. If you assume everyone is making the rational choice, you might be able to come up with some strategy, but if its against humans who might be trying to bluff, I have no idea. Although, they say its a win-win game, so maybe theres a way there too.
Deleted Comment
Deleted Comment
We have limited time in life - I do like to spend time fooling around with computers, other people like to spend time fooling around with other people.
I am never going to be as good in small talk as someone hanging out with people all the time. The same the other way someone dealing with technical issues all the time will just be so much better at fixing them.
I am also not that much interested in other people, well I have my close friends and family, but if I am in group with strangers I cannot crack a joke - even though I know the structure of a good joke and I can make my friends or coworkers laugh (it is much easier to get correct timing to drop a joke with people you meet on daily basis). Then there are those people who just own the room after 5 minutes mostly because they practiced it.
Yes taking it down to some steps looks like there is no difference - but there is difference on what I am spending my time on.
There is also this gap where you can learn and train javelin throwing for all your life but still you might not even get close to starting in the Olympics - even if you have all the steps of "how to throw a javelin" worked out. So I don't agree you can break something into steps and say "well that's the same thing just do XYZ and it works".
If you like computers, the skill floor for comp sci is lower for you. And if you like talking and cracking jokes, the skill floor for stand-up comedy is lower for you. These are subjective.
So the difference in the skill level required between them in reality might not be vastly different. (Only with regards to the skill floor)
Depends on context of course. In game dev someone who is "technical" can be asked to make the FPS higher during the boss fight, but can't be expected to re-sculpt the boss to make them look more muscular. Someone who is "creative" goes the other way around.
Someone who is "creative" uses blender/maya/z-brush/photoshop to solve problems, someone who is "technical" uses a text editor/compiler/debugger/profiler. It is a very different role. Some can do both, which is great of course, but pretending that everyone is a unicorn will not make happy outcomes.
> Putting yourself or someone else in a bucket of "technical" or "non-technical" creates a subconscious barrier to expanding your skills beyond your label while also giving you an excuse, and others the same low expectations.
Or describing someone's skills accurately they can figure out what they could be improving on.
Making the FPS higher, might require some creative hacks. Making a 3D model look exactly like your vision might require highly technical knowledge about your tools.
Going beyond acceptable standards, imo, requires both technical and creative skills. And I believe the split is closer than we think.
On the second note, I understand the point, however, it's subjective how it makes the person feel. I have seen many instances of "creative" people shy away from technical things because its "not who they are" and vice-versa.
Putting yourself or someone else in a bucket of "technical" or "non-technical" creates a subconscious barrier to expanding your skills beyond your label while also giving you an excuse, and others the same low expectations.
It is also a gray area I feel. Is writing efficient code a technical skill, while keeping maintainable or readable a soft skill? The difference seems similar to me.
I might be totally off here, but having a distinction has always felt weird to me.
I'm not downplaying soft skills, by the way. Soft skills are what get you successful in life. And the disdain some people have for soft skills vs hard skills is uncalled for, but that's a separate issue. Technical skills clearly mean something technical.
The updates are in this case, at least assuming others are doing something similar, is to increase expected price if you see sell for higher price and reduce if you see the sell for lower price. To figure out how much to update would be the hard part.