How To Unlock Your Hidden Potential (pareto principle 🧠)

[@TinaHuang1]

📊 365 Data Science 100% Free: bit.ly/3S8IXO3 Entire platform free for 2 weeks from November 6th - 20th 7am PST!

[@luizbertoneto]

The same phenomena that Pareto observed can also produce different findings. For for example, you could argue that since 80% of the land was owned by 20% of the people, there were masses of unlanded folk who had less power. The 20% with the land invested the money, got education for their kids and whatnot, while 80% of the population was grinding to survive. The descendants of the poor ones had more or less the same conditions of their parents, while the top 20% had better conditions than their parents. That analysis can indicate that free competition tends to lead to monopolies or oligopolies, since tiny advantages can cascade in the future, and tiny disadvantadges as well. Thanks for the video!

[@arzabael]

Man smart, you

[@arzabael]

@@mementomori1022 the only thing you can argue against the OP is the numbers of the percentages and even that is negligible. I see you said some smart things but denying the fact that a smaller and smaller group of people are getting more and more, easier and easier. The future, is where all the great technology that’s available, is only used by a small percentage of the population while the rest live in the badlands.

[@arzabael]

@@mementomori1022 I’m putting together what I think is a convincing portrayal of the dystopian future global society is heading toward in the form of a novel. If it’s not too much to ask what are some of the macro scenarios that will shape the far future when there are serious technological advancements like household helper robotics etc

[@Arri7979]

​@@mementomori1022​ I'm not the OP, so I'm not going to speak for the OP, but your arguments aren't as sound as you think they are. 1) In the time and place this theory was created, non-landowners would be equated to those in poverty. Not having land, a large portion of many people's wealth (up until recently in some areas of the world) meant you were either working on someone else's land or paying off the debts acquired by living and working for someone else. The idea of a "middle class" or a well to do non-landowner is a modern day concept. Most of the people in that time could not afford what the people who owned land had access to by virtue of being a landowner (which equated to social and oftentimes political captial). 2) An oligarchy is simply defined as a minority of the population controlling most of the people/property/money/etc. As Tina mentioned in the video, it's not always 80:20, but in this specific case it was. 20% does not have to be a large number. If this was a community of even 100 people, 20 people owning most of the land that the other 80 might live on is a significant advantage for that group economically, socially, and politically. 3) You're absolutely right that today, land does not equal wealth. Again, going back to the time and place this theory was created in, land ownership did equal wealth. Even if someone was cash poor, they had the means and connections to generate income in a way those without land did not. If you're in debt, sell some land or sign an agreement that you will use your land for X so that you can achieve Y (getting out of or significantly lowering your debt). The same cannot be said for someone without land. If you had no land in this time and you were in debt, the biggest way to get out of debt is to offer your labor which can only go so far and make so much money. It's not the same thing and owning land, even if someone is cash poor, was a significant advantage back then. 4) OP does mention the changes over time. OP even acknowledges that with time the top 20% will become more educated, more well connected, and more wealthy while the 80% will, more or less, stay the same regarding these factors. OP is not saying that the 80% will all do the same thing over time. OP is saying the 20% will change for the better over time while the 80% might change for the better (or worse), but will likely stay the same. 5) Why did you have to make this a socialism = bad capitalism = good point? OP mentioned neither of these systems in the original comment and OP's comment was not discussing modern day trends or political affiliations. OP is literally referring to the example Tina mentioned about an Italian community hundreds of years ago. This last point seems irrelevant to the original comment.

[@Fillup82]

It’s crazy how easy things become when you understand a few basic principles like this. Hope you’re all good Tina 🙌🏻

[@annabelleklein]

So true, just like doing very small changes to our daily routines can impact our lives :)

[@NorthernChimp]

1) Gather your database 2) Sort your data base 3) after that, learn how to build and process databases

[@legallybrunettemee]

Hey! I admire your channel and you inspired me to launch mine on studying tips and productivity! Thank you for such inspiration!!!

[@TinaHuang1]

aww tysm!! you got this!!

[@softwarearchitecturematter4482]

The 80/20 Rule is the arguably the most effective productivity strategy one can employ. With Regards, Vikas

[@dakshbhatnagar]

I love how differently different her videos are which makes me differently appreciate the difference in her differently different videos.

[@gideonmuteb8211]

thanks a lot Tina. I'm about to graduate from high school this year and want to have a career in data science and you've really helped me so much as mentor/teacher. please keep on enriching our lives with your content.🙏

[@myoramia]

Keep up making content such as this! Usually I don't write any comments, but this video was actually incredibly helpful. Thank you so much, Tina!

[@kermit8210]

Hey could you create a workshop for designing? How to start and go by just like you created for content creation. Was really helpful. Thanks

[@terencelim9889]

Discussion of topic that appeals to the general masses = minimum effort maximum result (i.e. pareto principle...appealing to human nature that seeks maximum reward with minimal grinding) Then links everything with promoting a learning platform Good playbook in monetizing 😬 gotta do what we gotta do right??

[@harveymoment]

assignemnt season, thanks for the motivation Tina

[@Dlmaniac8]

wow this is such an interesting video. I wish I had heard about the Pareto principle when I was studying for my boards. didn't realize that 20% contributes to 80% of gains at the gym.

[@ProfessionalDebugger]

Thanks for the warning! I am a surgeon and was just about to apply the pareto principle.

[@TinaHuang1]

LOL

[@sgzz1024]

Every video is sooo insightful

[@astronomer747]

How long have you lived in the US Tina? I hear the naturalization process is kind of a pian to deal with and it is hard to stay employed in today's economy. Your videos are always high quality and I always learn something new from them. You definitely have what it takes entertain and educate, so I appreciate your channel.

[@isalutfi]

Yes, I love this topic, Pareto Law. Thank you Tina! 💐

[@psych_shock4370]

Appreciate it Tina. You’re the best.

[@houseofpancakes379]

thank you, Tine

[@Tapouz1]

Hi Tina do you think there is or will ever be a way to automatically filter out sensitive images and videos using Dall E's AI technology ? This could be a mind changing feature for protecting our generation from inappropriate content

[@MongoosePreservationSociety]

Great video!!!!

[@Jay-ep3io]

Please make videos like these

[@fredrikbergquist5734]

Can you apply this principle to interior decorating? 20% IKEA will make your home look 80% good? 😂

[@NorthernChimp]

Two home-made pieces of furniture (assuming you have ten) will make your home look 80% more authentic; and the scars you got on 20% of your body doing so will attract 80% more girls 😉

[@fredrikbergquist5734]

@@NorthernChimp I think we should call it "the potato principle " 😂😂😂

[@NorthernChimp]

@@fredrikbergquist5734 Right. It's a known thing smaller potatoes give more yield.

[@alexb859]

Awesome video!!! Keep up the good work :)

[@TinaHuang1]

aww tyty!!

[@alexb859]

@@TinaHuang1 any time besty 😃👍🏻

[@zndr27]

Hold on now, are you hinting at some future body building videos on the channel? 💪FLEX

[@tiarambles]

How’s forex trading coming along?

[@Lavaboy1738]

Hi Tina! just saying hi lol hope you're doing well.

[@TinaHuang1]

hai c: I am tysm - hope you're doing well too!

[@Michael194]

You look a lot happier nowadays Tina, how're you doing?

[@TinaHuang1]

I'm doing really good! tysm for asking!! How are you doing?

[@Michael194]

​@@TinaHuang1I've gotten very active with tennis so that's a huge investment by itself, finding challenges that keeps me motivated ☺️. Since you're more freelance based now, how do you find the freedom it offers?

[@bin4ry_d3struct0r]

Off topic, but if you're someone who's willing to spend $3000 on a handbag, whatever happens happens!

[@pilotashish]

Lots of hypotheticals and pseudoscience. Not a convincing argument imo

[@hxncho7750]

First comment

[@keylanoslokj1806]

80% of desirable straight women chase the same 20% Chads. Same principle

[@Arri7979]

Not at all. Human desirability and attraction are way more complicated than that. You're assuming that 80% of desirable women to you will be the same 80% as others and that already isn't true. Yes, there may be overlap in people's desired traits or behaviors, but its not a circle, it may be more of a venn diagram, if that. Then, you make the assumption that the 20% of men would be the same exact men desired by this hypothetical group of women. This just isn't the case. Tina even says in the video that these numbers aren't always 80:20 and can vary based on a lot of factors. The main reason it's so effective for many people is because it builds consistency and something to build off of, which is the actual benefit we're seeing here.

[@keylanoslokj1806]

@@Arri7979 sure but now you are getting unnecessarily autistic about it. Truth is its proven in the same community women proclaim to fuck (ehm sorry... to "situationship" the same men as they "surprisingly" find out by talking with eachother). You can cope as much as you want, but men with the looks, masculinity, height, money and status that the average woman today wants to date are well in the top 5-10%. And it gets worse. The high tier normies of the 80s and 90s are the incels of today, since women are exposed to many more chads and rich men on social media, and their ego and delulu standards get even more inflated. So in summary women give their best self to the men that need them the least and find them highly replaceable since they have so many options to exercise

[@keylanoslokj1806]

@@Arri7979 as for "it's way more complicated than that." No it's not. Skeletal structure and development signalling. Abundance of options and resources. Muscular physique with broad "protective" shoulders. Good hair. Veiny arms. And kind of compatible immune systems, which is signalled through body odours and pheromones. And that's it. The same top chads play most of the women. Because they can.

[@Arri7979]

@@keylanoslokj1806 - This sounds more in the vein of pseudoscience than anything. Skeletal structure is not as varied as people think. I've literally studied Forensic Anthropology and the skeletal structure of most humans are not as varied as pseudosciencist claim. An abundance of options and resources goes beyond appearance and can be affected by social class, age, health, environment, social norms, etc. The other things you're listing are social and affected by culture. I've met plenty of women who are not interested in muscular men and that's purely due to environmental and social expectations and standards. Additionally, I've met many people (not just women, I'm also including "straight men") who prefer muscular men because that's the social environment they grew up in, so that's the expectation they have for someone they deem attractive. A muscular physique does not equate to health because it can be achieved in unhealthy ways and it is not a universal desirable trait. Health is more universal and can be shown in different ways. Good hair is also subjective. What I might deem good hair goes back to the social and cultural expectations I have for that. We can argue that shiny, thick, well-groomed hair is considered "good hair", but it isn't, especially for men where beauty standards seem more rigid and limited when it comes to hair. Some people might see the things I listed above as "feminine" and therfore unattractive on someone they deem masculine. Again, your idea of a "top Chad" (a term that makes me think you're not experiencing these things in real life, but hearing this from those who are chronically online) is not universal even within a community. And again, if this was true at all, then there would be less genetic diversity and less people in relationships because 80% of desirable straight women cannot be with 20% of the desirable male population. Again, not all people like the same thing, so you're going back to the assumption that all the women you might find desirable are going to be desirable to everyone else and all the men they find desirable will be the same men and neither are true.

[@keylanoslokj1806]

@@Arri7979 of course there is genetic diversity silly. Cause women after hitting the wall "settle down" with men (actually around their level). Those Chads only had them for pump and dump and bootycalls. So instead of dying alone with their cats, they marry a provider guy. Some even gaslight themselves into oblivion about why that's a better deal. Others are just cynical about it and fully realise the goldiggery. As for skeletal variation oh it is apparent mrs forensic scientologist. A few millimeters of bone put men galaxies apart in terms of attractiveness. It's literally exponential. If you think someone with Hernan Dracos jaw has the same behaviour from women, than a recessed jaw mouth breather subhuman, you arr completely delusional of the lives the average men live... .

[@sumitpanda7668]

are you single?

[@basedmanaf8100]

I loved how she smartly portrayed a man as a lazy douchebag and the woman as an efficient person whereas in reality the men are more efficient than women and that's why get paid more. Pareto principle says 80% of the misandry comes from 20% of the women.

[@mithos789]

buddy. the woke police gonna get you. the only reason she probably got the job is because of her race and sex.

[@githmi.]

i found your channel randomly and i fell in love immediately 🫶

[@TinaHuang1]

🫶🫶🫶

[@Buu-ss3vd]

Hello I sent you an in mail message on LinkedIn. Will you be my mentor ?