What is Digg?Sponsored by HowLifeWorks
How Smart Guys Keep Their Faces Looking Young view!
howlifeworks.com - Why men have finally started to use certain anti-aging skin care products...
81 Comments
- DiggDugglas, on 10/10/2007, -0/+11480% of diggers will read 20% of this article
- Twinked, on 10/10/2007, -2/+74At least we know Wordpress is going to crash 100% of the time.
- minorthreat, on 10/10/2007, -0/+24or is it 20% of diggers will read 80% of the article?
Something tells me its more like 95% will read the headline and write a 3 paragraph comment about the 2 sentence description. - Gugel, on 10/13/2007, -2/+19It's not a RULE. The 80/20 "rule" is a very rough guess when you have no other information to go on. The article makes it seem like the 80/20 "rule" is a law of nature.
- canuq, on 10/10/2007, -0/+15Mirror: http://mirror.canuq.com/3658775/psychologyofbusine ...
- schweeet, on 10/10/2007, -1/+15Also, rich 80 year old men have 20 year old girlfriends.
- yoda17, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1480% of the time Wordpress goes down after 20 views?
- RogerT1, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1267% of all statistics are made up on the spot.
- KevenM, on 10/10/2007, -6/+17Nothing new here. It's called the long tail.
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1160% of time it works all of the time
- totorototoro, on 10/10/2007, -0/+10But Sturgeon's 90/100 law is still going strong :p
- harrisbradley, on 10/10/2007, -1/+920% of the digits on my hands are thumbs, and 80% are fingers.
- diggitydoc, on 10/10/2007, -1/+8only 80% of the time.
- haleym, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6Also, FTA: "80% of Digg Front-page items are by 20% of the Digg Users"
- mattsx, on 10/10/2007, -2/+880% of the time Wordpress will go down before 20% of total potential diggs for the article are dugg.
- ZenMojo, on 10/10/2007, -1/+680% of American wealth is still owned by 20% of the population (actually, it's closer to over 80% owned by 16%, but the Pareto Principle is eerily accurate here). Too bad the internet can't solve that problem.
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5More like 95% are by 5% of digg users!
- Lukas2000, on 10/10/2007, -2/+7This explains the 20% of American who still support Bush
- bacon_skoda, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6Will the 80/20 rule stop harassing the 80/20 or else the 80/20 would win.
9/11 - joeyjojo402, on 10/10/2007, -2/+7Straight from the mouth of Asshat.
- SpykerSpeed, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5Noam Chomsky is an economist now? Heh.
- Terr01, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4If it's a "law of natural situations" then I expect just as much rigor as "f=ma".
It's not a law. It's a guideline. It's a rule of thumb. Don't call it a law, nor a prescriptive rule. - proghead, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4***** you wordpress
- Chaoticfist, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Get a blog!!!!
- Jo9100, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Wordpress is not the problem, it is only reporting that it can't connect to the crashed sql db
- wburglett, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Internet business is killing my 80:20 vision
- OnlyShawn, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3...yep. There's an econtalk podcast with Chris Anderson that I listened to about this (if anyone's interested):
http://www.econtalk.org/archives/2006/08/chris_and ... - solinent, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3so we can read it later on digg
- manitoba98xp, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Mirrors:
http://businessshrink.biz.nyud.net:8080/psychology ...
http://72.14.209.104/search?q=cache%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2 ... - jbird123, on 11/15/2007, -1/+4thank you :)
- surferdale, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4Shhhhh. Don't tell anyone about the long tail! ;)
- weaksnyc, on 08/14/2009, -0/+3Almost as much of a revelation as your comment... which has already been stated in the very first comment on this page.
- saphyrre, on 10/10/2007, -3/+6Digg & WordPress = crap
site is down already. - inactive, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4If you read the article you'd see that about 20% of the article refers to some research done from inc.com. However, a lot of the article focuses on MIT's research. So buzz off!
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -3/+6What's new are the case studies and research produced in the last few months that show the trend is only increasing and driving a wedge between online and offline business. But thanks for the comment nonetheless. :)
- yeahright, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3At first I was thinking this was referring to Cisco's 80/20 rule. That is, you should design corporate networks based on 80% of network traffic being local, and the remaining 20% is external. Of course, because of the massive shift in network usage in the last decade, Cisco changed this to the 20/80 rule in the early 2000's (20% local, 80% external).
Sorry, tad of a sidetrack there, working on the CCNP switching exam at the moment. It's been fried into my head. - rotten777, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2now if we could only fix that "coming back up" problem
- DangerMouse9, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2So are you saying that Asshat is a catcher then?
- rolosworld, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4wordpress crashes on businessshrink.biz
seems they really meant the domain. - solinent, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2time - 20%
ipod charge - 80%
you only listen to half of the songs - priceless - WebWorker, on 10/10/2007, -1/+320% of diggers will see the article, 80% will get a Word Press error
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2No, the internet is no cure for stupidity or laziness.
- footodors, on 10/10/2007, -4/+6The sales-based 80/20 rule (i.e. 80% of sales from 20% of customers) will eventually apply to the rest of the population as well. A certain futurist CEO said it best...in the very near future, I'll need only 20% percent of my employees to make and sell 80% of my products.
In fact, MY OWN JOB is to make sure this rapid acceleration to full automation goes faster and faster. What the majority of the people on this site do NOT realize is that in the future, 80% of the world's population will be basically "Useless Eaters" since they can't afford to buy or be able to make use of what us 20% elite make and have.
That same 80% "Useless Eater" population also won't have or make anything of what us 20% elite want or need.
Thus YOU WILL be relegated to the fringes of a high-tech, cognitively and physically elite society.
The future is a bleak one for those on the cognitive fringes.
Even now, it is the innate smarts, ability and drive that count and this will only get worse as 80% of the world simply doesn't have what it takes and the 20% who do, will stratify ourselves even further into a cognitive elite with the best education, best biological and cognitive enhancements, and of course the best robotic servants money can buy. The rest of you will starve outside of our well-fortified, well-armed, robotically-patrolled, hermetically-sealed enclaves, while the rest of humanity starves and fights over the scraps we will throw out to you......and you know what? I'm all right with that!
The Earth is already overpopulated with stupid dolts who are mostly illiterate, ignorant and indolent. I would be highly surprised that the majority has even matriculated from a primary-level education.
Can anyone spell anymore?
Since smarts and ambition are primarily genetic and thus heritable traits, the rich will only get richer (and generally smarter as we enhance our cognitive and physical abilities) while the poor will get poorer, sicker and more stupid! In 50 to 100 years, advanced technology and biology will make us elite as above the non-elite as they are currently above the amoeba!
And in the end, there is NOTHING they can do about it since they WON'T be able to win a fight against an advanced, cognitively and physically elite society. It would be like the caveman throwing sticks and stones at a 70 ton tank. You get run over in the process.... - ZenMojo, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2I'm one of the 1%ers and I have to honestly say, the rest of you 19%ers in the 20%ers are making us ***** look bad. Smart enough to contribute, too stupid to realize you don't contribute all that ***** much, and therefore empowered to believe you're better than the rest of the 80%. Get a ***** life.
Guess what? The rest of the 80% includes children and invalids. Guess we should throw out those pointless *****, right? Oh, but you're in the top 20%, not the top 1%, so that never occurred to you. Not to mention that the blue-collar labor that the rest of the 80% contributes can only be replaced by mechanizing everything and then mechanizing the maintenance of that mechanization, and so on, and so on, and so on, until what you eventually reach is a nearly irreducible radicalism.
This overlooks several other factors. Namely, the resistance to mechanization that the top 20% exhibits (the top 20% not only hate to work without a reason, they hate to be told to work without a reason, they are overly opinionated, and they tend to have low morale the higher up the scale they get). Smart people make ***** WORKERS, and corporations know this. This is why they promote stupidity over talent in every field (what my law professor called the "PITA principle"). The true nature of economic optimization is keeping enough of the bottom 80% on the payroll to maintain and drudge while paying the top 20% enough to overcome our inherent corruption, paradoxical idealism, tendency to manipulate and subvert the system, and just plain moodiness. - VitriolAndAngst, on 10/10/2007, -0/+299% of the Digg stories are submitted by 1% of the Diggers.
20% of the people who annoy the ***** out of everyone 100% of the time, think they are doing 80% of the work -- while I can work around 50% of the time and do twice what they do.
I used to do 90% of the work, and then I realized that it merely meant I was making crap that only 10% of the people were reading. So by slowing down, I produced less crap (no better quality) and now people have less to read -- thus maintaining the 80/20 rule and my sanity.
80% of the people believe a rule like this pulled out of the asses of 20% of the people who write ***** articles.
80% of the work done in the USA is based on stuff we don't have to do anyway. Only 20% of us are doing anything necessary at all. I'm in Financial Serivices doing Marketing. I can safely say, that without a useless government making work for TSA agents, I am also in that 80% group. - Radar3D, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2And you clearly missed the Anchorman reply reference.
- pangea, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2The title and blurb mentioned the 80/20 rule four times but doesn't explain what it is. Even if it doesn't explain, there's no need to say it four times.
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Quit all the whining, so the database crashed for less than 20 minutes. It's back up. :)
-
Show 51 - 85 of 85 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is