- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
You must log in or register to comment.
I wanted to downvote, but then I read it. While I don’t accept the premise entirely, I think the points are very well made and thought out well (even if taken to the extreme).
Scott Adams
Alright im out
You like Scott Adams so much you’re unwilling to read a rebuttal to one of his posts?
It doesn’t help that, when stated nakedly, that sounds elitist…
“I’m not like… elitist man, but like, being better than 19 out of 20 other programmers like… isn’t actually that good!”
Takes drag on topshelf hybrid joint laced with gold dust and 100% pure Colombian nose powder. Exhales slowly.
“Like, when being better than 95% of people like… isn’t that hard man, you know?”
Takes another drag.
“Damn this is good shit. I like it anyway. It’s got like… gold dust in it? You probably wouldn’t like it.”
One in Twenty.
The 95th percentile means you’re in the top twentieth.
In a group of 40, one will be better than you. In a group of 100, four will be better than you. In a group of 1,000, which is still a small number of people, 49 will be better than you.
The article doesn’t once mention what 95p actually means, as a number. When you think about the actual number, it’s clear that it’s not a big deal.
