I saw the argument in the game thread....

[Butcher]

<!--quoteo(post=53384:date=Jul 29 2009, 05:55 PM:name=bz)-->QUOTE (bz @ Jul 29 2009, 05:55 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=53380:date=Jul 29 2009, 05:52 PM:name=Butcher)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Butcher @ Jul 29 2009, 05:52 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=53377:date=Jul 29 2009, 05:50 PM:name=bz)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (bz @ Jul 29 2009, 05:50 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->PS- I'm glad you added "his gut" to your wager so that the bet exists in a black and white scenario...despite the fact that most people probably use a degree of calculated and educated decision making. It's like you think there's either binary or random impulses. You must hate bell curves.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Take off "his gut" and it doesn't change my wager.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Here's the flaw...how does the robomanager account for evaluating talent. Since statistics are evaluated retrospectively, how does, say, the robot manage a low A team?
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
[img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/rolleyes.gif[/img]