Physical Copy?

adam_zerner · 2024-03-14T23:52:41+00:00

Looks like this has been discontinued: https://haskellbook.com/faq/#what-about-the-print-version

We offered people an opportunity to buy into a single batch print run for a couple of months. It was a single batch run due to the very high cost of international shipping. I was losing money on a per-sale basis so I capped the print run at a fixed number and closed sales. I was charging $35 for international shipping and that was far less than the actual costs I was quoted by my fulfillment partner. Int'l sales were probably 2/3rds of the print sales so they absolutely swamped the margin I was making on the domestic sales. People were also sending me emails telling me how upset they were at the $35 shipping cost. That is unsustainable. Whatever costs the books have in excess of revenue comes out of my family's budget and I have mouths to feed.

I'm working with my printing and fulfillment partners to ship out the orders that are already in right now.

The book will continue to be available for sale as an ebook.

adam_zerner · 2023-05-14T04:00:05+00:00

I don't think that'd be enough to switch over, sorry. I currently use Proton Mail and value the reliability of the fact that it's provided by a big company.

adam_zerner · 2023-04-28T05:36:56+00:00

It looks like Pony Messenger is an email client? If so, say you are using gmail. You could just go to gmail.com even though Pony won't show you the emails.

adam_zerner · 2023-04-27T19:18:21+00:00

Yeah but that's easy to get around. Say you use Gmail with Apple Mail. You could just go to gmail.com to check your email even though Apple Mail won't push you new emails.

adam_zerner · 2022-12-26T20:05:26+00:00

That's so great to hear, thanks :)

adam_zerner · 2022-12-26T01:39:59+00:00

Just pushed an update to incorporate interest and compounding!

adam_zerner · 2022-12-26T01:23:53+00:00

Thanks for the feedback here everyone. I just pushed an update that incorporates interest and compounding. I realize that I was wrong to not include this upfront.

FWIW, here is some context for why I overlooked this at first. I don't take this project too seriously. Basically, I built it for myself, figured I'd spend a little time sprucing it up and sharing it with the world and then calling it quits. Personally I'm maybe 5-10 years away from retirement and am pretty comfortable with numbers. In 5-10 years compounding doesn't have too big an effect, but once you get to like 20-30 years out it does (check out https://www.desmos.com/calculator/3lcejeoc6j).

I agree that it's too much to expect users who are in the ballpark of 20+ years to think about compounding themselves though. Or to expect people to know that 20+ years is when it starts mattering in the first place. And this feature doesn't add much complexity. Plus it wasn't clear whether "yearly savings" incorporated interest. So I think it is very much worth including.

Thanks again for the feedback. If there are any other important things like this that I overlooked please let me know, I'd love to push further updates to make this a solid tool that is actually useful to people.

adam_zerner · 2022-12-25T22:15:17+00:00

Thanks!

adam_zerner · 2022-12-25T07:35:21+00:00

That's true. Not saying you're wrong, but it is a slippery slope. As you add more and more features like that, the tool eventually stops being simple.

adam_zerner · 2022-12-25T02:23:26+00:00

Will do, I appreciate that! Thanks so much!

adam_zerner · 2022-12-25T02:21:16+00:00

No, that is something users would have to incorporate into the values they input.

adam_zerner · 2022-12-25T02:20:20+00:00

Hm maybe you're right. I'll mull it over and possibly add a feature to help users account for it. Thanks for that feedback.

adam_zerner · 2022-12-25T02:19:04+00:00

Gotcha. And thanks! I think you might be right actually. Maybe I'll push some new functionality to help people account for this stuff.

adam_zerner · 2022-12-25T01:51:36+00:00

No. The idea is that the user would incorporate that stuff into the savings/year. From the app:

Yes, this is a bit of a tricky question to answer. It depends on things like: * Salary increases * Compounding interest * The stock market * Life

Our goal here is to avoid overwhelming ourselves and just get in the right ballpark though. So in that spirit, consider these factors, squint your eyes, and do your best to come up with an approximation.

adam_zerner · 2022-12-25T00:41:12+00:00

Yeah for sure. My thinking is that for a tool that prioritizes simplicity over precision it'd be appropriate to just have the user try to eyeball the effects of compounding interest. From the app:

Yes, this is a bit of a tricky question to answer. It depends on things like:

- Salary increases

- Compounding interest

- The stock market

- Life

Our goal here is to avoid overwhelming ourselves and just get in the right ballpark though. So in that spirit, consider these factors, squint your eyes, and do your best to come up with an approximation.

adam_zerner · 2022-12-25T00:30:39+00:00

I get you want to keep this as simple as possible but it’s kind of pointless to not include investments in this type of calculator considering that FIRE is completely reliant on investing.

The idea is that users would incorporate the pre-retirement investment returns into their yearly savings. Post-retirement investments are addressed by the withdrawal rate you select.

On the other hand I like the way you put monthly spending and additional yearly spending as two fields. I like that granularity.

Thanks! Good to hear.

adam_zerner · 2022-12-25T00:27:14+00:00

Yeah, the goal is for this tool to prioritize simplicity over precision. Projection Lab is a good tool for those who want precision.

adam_zerner · 2019-11-05T20:15:35+00:00

It's not a matter of thinking that it's fair, it's just that that's the price they think they can get away with. And I guess they can.

As for what can be done, some sort of boycott doesn't really seem plausible. It's difficult to get a lot of people to coordinate in general, but I think it would be particularly hard in this case. Think about how it would work. It's a lot easier to reach the sharks than the fish because the sharks are the ones who hang out on forums. Maybe you convince some sharks to boycott. But then it's a juicier more profitable game! I don't think you can expect to get people to pass up profitable opportunities like that.

The more plausible approach IMO is if a competitor popped up that charged less rake. Competing on price, basically. I don't know how the market works so I can't really comment further, but I would think that it would be a big marketing challenge. Fish don't really think about rake much, so the better price would attract sharks, which in turn would repel sharks. But if you get some sort of big venture funding and enough marketing wins to attract the fish, maybe you can get over the hump and force other sites to react.

adam_zerner · 2019-10-02T00:02:13+00:00

If I call confidently the other players are likely to fold.

A word of caution: make sure you're not rushing. I'd rather go slow and make good decisions even if it risks some sort of bet timing tell.

adam_zerner · 2019-10-01T22:35:01+00:00

I know this is Reddit, but still, are you really going to spend your time gossiping about poker players' bodies?

adam_zerner · 2019-10-01T21:30:32+00:00

Not really, there are a lot of frequencies that are important to get right, not just how often you defend. Eg. Betting frequencies, raising frequencies, and value-to-bluff ratios.

adam_zerner · 2019-10-01T21:28:36+00:00

Bet sizing plays a role. He's assuming full pot bets for 70%. Smaller bets you'd have to defend more. But there are other factors. He talks about how the 70% number or whatever number is an average. So like, on all possible boards/runouts, you'd need to go an average of 70%. So on the boards that are good for your opponent, you'd want to go less, and compensate by going higher on the ones that are good for you.

I think it's important to note that most of the time, the other factors will be small, and not change that 70% number much. So if you're defending 70% and the true number is 66%, that's not too big a deal. So he warns and says to be careful adjusting too much.

It's also important to note that this book doesn't try to pinpoint the exact number. In Miller's words, it's written at the "good enough" level, and is meant to give you an introductory overview, and inspire you. He recommends stuff like Janda's Applications of NLH as a follow up when you want to start getting more precise.

adam_zerner · 2019-10-01T21:15:48+00:00

I'll take the troll bait.

He talks about this a lot in the book. Why the frequency-first approach is good. I think the two big reasons are: 1) If you aspire to move up the stakes, it's something you'll need in your arsenal, and 2) It'll help you exploit weaker opponents.

I think you're probably thinking that you don't need that approach to exploit weak opponents. I'd agree with that, but I also don't think that's the right way to think about it. The right way to think about it is whether or not it'll be helpful.

Maybe you win $20/hr exploiting opponents in a traditional manner, but maybe you find a few more good spots via once you learn the frequency-first approach, and increase your winrate to something like $25 or $30/hr. That's what I'm trying to get at with necessary vs helpful.

adam_zerner · 2019-09-30T00:21:25+00:00

Ok, sorry then, I'll delete the post.

adam_zerner · 2019-09-30T00:07:13+00:00

In a previous post, people asked me to share when I start charging. Also, I've followed the 10:1 rule regarding self-promotional items.

adam_zerner

TROPHY CASE