arnold8020

4 ms·

1.
by arnold8020 7y ago
Back in 2017, I was wondering about this in the context of the 80-20 rule, and believe I have a simple answer (posted to hacker news way back, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16618385 ). Basically you need two things: 1
2.
by arnold8020 8y ago
Below is a repost, but fits very appropriately here, the results are very similar! The pdf pre-dates my small work on this, but you may find the simulation interesting, http://www.cs.toronto.edu/~arnold/research/80
3.
by arnold8020 8y ago
I believe that the situation is simpler and more powerful than what the article claims. Basically you need two things: 1) Some slight advantage 2) The network effect, that is, for example, the probability of competing depends on the current
4.
by arnold8020 8y ago
I modified the simulation as follows: I allowed it to evolve for a single generation, enough time for the top 20% of the population to have 80% of the wealth. I now choose a random sample from the top 20% of the population to follow, lets c
5.
by arnold8020 8y ago
Interesting that you see it as 'winner takes all'. Wondering why you say that. The simulation can be run in various ways. When I run with rules: r1) Actors have normally distributed abilities, r2) Actors are chosen randomly based
6.
by arnold8020 8y ago
I was wondering about this in the context of the 80-20 rule, and believe I have a simple answer. Basically you need two things: 1) Some slight advantage 2) The network effect, that is, the probability of competing depends on the current wi
7.
by arnold8020 9y ago
About a year ago, I asked similar questions about the 80-20 rule and income distributions. It seems that the simple explanation works surprisingly well. Simulate the following system and it matches real world distributions surprisingly well