Re:Why you should fail early and fail often - the numbers
by ojbyrne on Monday January 19, 2009 @08:14AM
(#440415)
Implying that 10 year's work on a project doesn't increase your odds in the slightest over 1 year's work seems implausible, and it's easy to draw the obvious conclusion - why spend a year on anything? Why not a month, or even a day? Then you get 3650 (+ a couple more for leap years) ideas to try.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Why you should fail early and fail often - the numbers
by mixmax on Monday January 19, 2009 @08:32AM
(#440425)
Of course spending ten years on a project increases your chances of success, but that's missing the point. What is interesting is that it has to increase by 1000% in relation to starting ten projects in ten years.
Re:Why you should fail early and fail often - the numbers
by ojbyrne on Monday January 19, 2009 @09:21AM
(#440451)
I don't think it's missing the point. I brought up the extreme example of switching every day to show that the math is specious.
Re:Why you should fail early and fail often - the numbers
by cjenkins on Monday January 19, 2009 @09:43AM
(#440466)
I think the math works, but the difficult part is what the minimum amount of time needed to know if you're going to succeed or fail. If you knew that, or even in the ballpark you'd have something you could apply. Otherwise it's hard to say if a day or a year is a better measure.