Curious Omission In New-Style Formats

[Antoon Pardon]

Op 15-07-16 om 10:40 schreef Jussi Piitulainen:
> Antoon Pardon writes:
>
>> Op 15-07-16 om 08:06 schreef Marko Rauhamaa:
>>> Common usage among educated speakers ordinarily is the yardstick for
>>> language questions.
>> But educated about what exactly?
>>
>> Each time someone talks about "a steep learning curve" in order to
>> indicate something is difficult to master, he is using it wrong,
>> because actual steep learning curves indicate something can be
>> mastered quickly.
>>
>> Now I suspect most people who talk about steep learning curves are
>> educated, they just aren't educated about learning curves and so I
>> think common usage among educated speakers is inadequate as a yard
>> stick.
> I think I see your point, but I think it's also easy to think the axes
> of the metaphor so that it makes sense:
>
> c      ,
> o     ,
> s    ,
> t . .
>  l e a r n i n g

Only for someone who is not very familiar with how we graphically
represent results. The cost/effort is always put on the X-ax because
that is what we directly control and also because that is what always
increases. You can't unspent time in trying to master something. We
make this choice because we want a mathematical function.

What if you have a set back? How do you show that on your graph?

Ask people if they prefer a steep or shallow pay check curve. Most
seem very quick in choosing for the steep curve.

-- 
Antoon