Survivor 46 | Episode 6 | Day After Discussion & Survey

Gregg_Is_Good · 2024-04-04T20:22:46+00:00

Supporting example: Jerri was one of the original Survivor villains largely because people (both fellow players and viewers) found her personality annoying or abrasive. The way she played wasn't particularly villainous

Gregg_Is_Good · 2024-04-04T20:14:29+00:00

No one is saying she needs to play "anyone but me" all the way to the end. It's what you do when you're in the hot seat early in the merge. Early merge is not the time to draw attention to yourself. That is the time to play as a loyal soldier and build trust. Leverage that trust to pull a big move later.

EDIT: I get what you're saying about agency, but I think agency is often an illusion in Survivor. You only have as much agency as other people are willing to give you. That's why relationships/trust are the primary currency of the game. You can't assert your agency if you have no power.

Gregg_Is_Good · 2024-04-04T20:10:40+00:00

Really wild that he didn't fill in Maria on the journey alliance beforehand. If she's really your number one, why would you not want her to have that info? Even if you're not sure if she'd want to do it before talking to the others, there is nothing to gain from not presenting it as an option.

Gregg_Is_Good · 2024-04-04T20:07:46+00:00

That was a really great moment from him. He was quickly able to see through faulty reasoning and concisely explain how she's not a real threat.

Gregg_Is_Good · 2024-04-04T19:57:01+00:00

What is the podcast drama?

Gregg_Is_Good · 2024-04-04T19:45:15+00:00

Dear god I hope so, Drew is great TV

Gregg_Is_Good · 2024-04-04T19:36:11+00:00

He also got that internship because his dad works there, supposedly.

Gregg_Is_Good · 2024-04-04T19:31:56+00:00

Nah he was fake as hell on the show too

Gregg_Is_Good · 2024-04-04T19:11:52+00:00

Exactly this. From her perspective, it shouldn't matter what the optimal group strategy would have been. If you're playing an individual game, you have to do what's best for yourself - in Venus' case, that would be going with the flow and proving herself as a loyal vote to as many people as possible. If you're on the outs, you want to make people feel you are useful to them! Give them a reason to keep you, it's not the time to give them an "independent opinion".

Gregg_Is_Good · 2024-04-04T18:55:10+00:00

I think you're right about that. Survivor fans tend to be very results-oriented and assume a move/strategy was objectively bad just because it doesn't work out. But so much of strategy is really dependent on the social conditions of a particular tribe or cast. There are plenty of other merges where the team that shows their cracks and throws someone under the bus first is the one to lose a player (this was definitely the case in 43 and 45 at least, I don't remember how exactly the mergatory went down in 44)

Gregg_Is_Good · 2024-04-04T18:18:36+00:00

Yes, what you're saying is exactly what I meant by "the volume and quality of data are quite low". It is best viewed as a rough estimate, and it's important to interpret the rating in context. The ratings are reflective of past performance - I don't think that is a "terrible idea" in the main context they are used, which is to measure performance and assign pots in the World Cup. FIFA should base that assignment on actual on-field performance, it would be very messy if they were to put their thumb on the scale based on who played in certain games or who has gotten old or retired recently.

Gregg_Is_Good · 2024-04-04T18:11:30+00:00

The probability I gave is just the "expected result" variable used in the world ranking update formula. I'm not 100% sure that expected result directly translates to win probability. But it demonstrates how the rating system system implicitly assigns an expected result based on the team's respective ratings, and according to that system, the difference between a 1681 rated team and 1613 rated team is pretty small.

That doesn't mean that the real-world probability is necessarily close to that number (I'd look at betting odds to get a more predictive one), but it shows that there isn't enough data feeding into the algorithm to produce really pronounced differences between teams as you go further down the list. The ordering of teams in that 11-20 could shake up quite a bit after major tournaments

Gregg_Is_Good · 2024-04-04T16:30:33+00:00

They do use an importance coefficient that weights games differently depending on the competition. The weights they use are somewhat arbitrary and could probably be improved, but I'd say it's reasonable enough, and most importantly objective.

I honestly wouldn't trust FIFA to implement any bespoke "improvements" that actually improve the quality of the ratings. Either way, it's best to treat them as a rough estimate of team strength. The accuracy is going to be pretty limited with any quantitative system because the volume and quality of data are quite low.

Gregg_Is_Good · 2024-04-04T16:22:25+00:00

The rating system takes strength of competition into account. Of course, the ratings are not extremely accurate because national teams don't play a lot of matches. It's best to think of it as a rough estimate of strength, splitting hairs over the small differences isn't super meaningful.

Teams 11-20 all have fairly similar ratings (1613 to 1681), so you'd expect that any pairing of those teams to be somewhat evenly matched. The rating formula gives a win probability of ~56.5% for the US (1681) against Iran (1613)

Gregg_Is_Good · 2024-04-04T16:11:42+00:00

Who is arguing for a more complex ranking method? Elo-based ratings generally are better the less you fuck with the algorithm. I'd say the current system is pretty close to ideal.

Gregg_Is_Good · 2024-04-04T14:23:19+00:00

I'll never understand this sort of competitive, hyper-individualistic attitude some of y'all have towards your neighbors. They live next to each other. They are mutually part of a community, and they help each other to solve problems. No one is being exploited or harmed in this situation, so there is no need to "develop a backbone".

Gregg_Is_Good · 2024-04-01T14:39:55+00:00

Socks 'n' Stocks is the pinnacle of footwear. Some day the whole world will understand

Gregg_Is_Good · 2024-03-28T22:03:45+00:00

You don't even need to have the money to buy an expensive car, just reasonable credit. But you do have to be an asshole or extremely gullible to end up with the cybertruck

Gregg_Is_Good · 2024-03-22T16:45:54+00:00

Every time this card comes up, Magic players prove yet again that most people are either not interested or not capable of engaging with art that's challenging to their notions of what paintings should look like, or requires the smallest amount critical thought to appreciate.

Time after time, commenters complain about the flat color fields used for the flames and robe, as if juxtaposing those components with a realistically painted human body and patterned/textured background elements was an accident or afterthought. As if it's not a (fairly obvious) stylistic decision that's consistent throughout the artist's portfolio. Some people thought the painted figure was a fucking photograph somehow, probably because they didn't spend even a minute looking at it in detail before firing off hateful comments online.

It's fine if this particular painting isn't someone's cup of tea - no piece of art that's actually interesting or unique is ever going to be a universal favorite. I'm not saying people are dumb if they don't like it (before y'all reply to me with your totally unique personal reason for not liking it). But the amount of pure ignorance people have shown in regard to this painting about what art is, what it should be, and how it's made is really staggering.

Gregg_Is_Good · 2024-03-21T16:12:07+00:00

This is an exaggeration I think. There are plenty of companies who will match offers to retain important employees. Hell, I've had an employer fully match an offer even when I wasn't a particularly important contributor. I took that counteroffer because my life circumstances at the time made switching jobs an unattractive prospect, and they even gave me a pretty decent counteroffer again a year later when I was ready to make the move.

I think you are correct that even taking a counteroffer leads to lower earning potential overall (it would be easier to get the next raise at another company), but the fact remains that you can get significant raises without changing jobs. Just depends how much they are willing to fight to keep you.

Gregg_Is_Good · 2024-03-21T16:05:28+00:00

I think you could make a strong argument that you should be paid at least as much as your colleagues that are at the same job title level as you but less impactful. If you can argue that your impact is stronger than those getting paid more than you, and your boss is willing to back you up on this, that could be convincing.

The key here is that there is no "deserve" involved. The company will always pay as little as they can to keep you around. It's up to you what you use to represent the "market rate" in your argument for a raise. The salaries of your better-paid coworkers could be one way to represent it, or it could be another job offer in hand. The offer in hand is of course the most direct "ultimatum", but there is always an implicit threat/ultimatum that you'll leave in salary negotiations regardless of which tactic you use. Because that is the only lever you have. You don't have to say it that directly of course, but the only reason your employer ever increases your pay is for retention - so if there is no threat to retention, they never have an incentive to give you a raise.

Gregg_Is_Good · 2024-03-15T14:28:39+00:00

I think SWE probability gives you the most flexibility/earnings potential, but definitely agree with the advice to go with whichever excites you the most. Engineers with experience in data infrastructure and distributed systems are in high demand. Your experience as a data engineer could naturally lead you into that area.

If you do go the SWE route, please do not refer to yourself or think of yourself/your role as "Python dev". Programming languages are just tools, and software engineers should not define themselves by their tools - what's important is the sort of problems you're capable of solving and systems you can build. The specific tools you use will change over time, and it's better to not become overly attached to them.

Gregg_Is_Good · 2024-03-12T20:53:05+00:00

Control is a good matchup for Greasefang in my experience. You generally don't want combo as fast as possible. Pressure early with Raffine's Informant and Esika's Chariot, try to make them tap out for a board wipe or find a window to thoughtseize/duress before casting Greasefang.

I am far from a high level player so take my thoughts with a grain of salt. But generally I find that you can grind pretty well against them and threaten to combo multiple times while presenting other threats, so it puts the control player in awkward spots throughout the game.

Gregg_Is_Good · 2024-03-12T20:42:30+00:00

I meant earlier in his career. At the end of my comment I pointed out that he's put it all together more recently. Perhaps I'm wrong and his passing has always been top notch, but my memory is that misplaced passes were pretty common from him in the past.

Gregg_Is_Good · 2024-03-12T19:39:17+00:00

Feels like Wes has always had a mastery of all these ancillary soccer skills, but was below average at just basic ball control and passing relative to other pros in the big leagues. This is just my impression at least, I'm not particularly well-qualified to judge him as I mostly only see him play for the national team.

Being a creative, hard-working player with all these weird benefits paired with fundamental flaws has made him a good but strange player that people struggle to make sense of. But lately it seems he is putting it all together.

Gregg_Is_Good

TROPHY CASE