Hacker Read

kadoban · 2021-11-28 20:05:31

Are you by any chance seriously putting forth the 3/5s compromise as a positive outcome?

dredmorbius | karma 63069 | avg karma 2.05 · | 2021-10-05 08:29:01

There is of course the compromise position of 0.5.

Daishiman | karma 7437 | avg karma 2.91 · | 2023-08-31 13:19:53

I'm not sure if you're aware that 3-5C is perfectly within the business-as-usual scenarios and 5C is easily a civilization-ending trend.

stormthebeach | karma 11 | avg karma 0.85 · | 2019-04-26 11:49:34

I'd like to put my hat in to support the 5/3/1 approach over traditional 5x5s. I managed to get my way to a ~317 wilks on a 5x5 program and after taking a few years off and getting back in with 5/3/1, I wish I had had the patience to leverage a more well rounded approach like 5/3/1.

cheald | karma 13949 | avg karma 4.5 · | 2020-07-16 00:26:12

5/3/1 is my personal choice.

mathgladiator | karma 4251 | avg karma 2.71 · | 2013-10-28 06:03:57+00:00

Perhaps the next level is to realize that getting 3/5 means you are human. ;)

0x0000000 | karma 719 | avg karma 3.44 · | 2023-11-22 20:41:53

I did not interpret the comment that way, they didn't frame it negatively or "can't do".

Personally, based on the 3.5 and 4.0 responses in this thread, I prefer 3.5.

reply

nabakin | karma 1646 | avg karma 2.83 · | 2023-05-11 00:35:33

Why are you confident 3.5 is smaller than 3?

yaur | karma 822 | avg karma 1.82 · | 2021-04-25 21:56:36

That may be what its intended. But 5 -> 3 is a world apart from 5 -> 5.95. One is consumer friendly (and groundbreaking information theory) and the other is just about reducing margins while pretending to be consumer friendly.

raincole | karma 4769 | avg karma 3.85 · | 2023-12-11 05:45:06

It's safe to assume they are confident it's better than 3.5. But people can be confident and wrong.

tome | karma 8885 | avg karma 1.75 · | 2023-11-04 07:40:22

I see. So even though 3.5 would attempt to answer your question, the results from 4 are significantly better?

golemotron | karma 1941 | avg karma 1.18 · | 2014-10-31 07:02:37+00:00

bradhe | karma 1280 | avg karma 1.53 · | 2018-09-11 18:34:43+00:00

You mean 3 in 5??

ForOldHack | karma 346 | avg karma 0.8 · | 2024-04-11 01:08:01

No, not 3.5, they said 5, but I think they mean 5 1/4. Think they could use floppy emulators, and get another 20 years out of the controls?

spywaregorilla | karma 6714 | avg karma 2.33 · | 2024-02-10 15:32:05

true! but this is a case of won't, not can't. the 3.5 AI 100% can do this.

airbreather | karma 971 | avg karma 1.15 · | 2022-03-21 17:32:16

Yes 3.5, sorry wasn't really on the ball that day.

ALittleLight | karma 13088 | avg karma 3.97 · | 2021-05-27 19:32:05+00:00

I think 3 and 5 are the problematic variables there, not SF.

wmichelin | karma 723 | avg karma 3.29 · | 2021-02-01 17:51:58+00:00

I don't see why you'd keep 3.5 around

mensetmanusman | karma 15660 | avg karma 1.72 · | 2023-09-05 07:45:30

Yeah, someone should model the predicted “pain” scale of this transition. I don’t think going from 5 to 4 is going to be as linearly painful as 3 to 2.

mkl | karma 11432 | avg karma 2.64 · | 2019-08-10 11:06:31

2.5 is closer and easier.