I love the sentiment of the post, and tried it myself.
I think a prompt like this makes answers less extreme than what they actually are, because itās like a vibes-based answer instead of a model-based answer. I would be surprised if you are not in the top 1% globally.
I would really enjoy something like this but more model-based, as the GWWC calculator. Does anyone know of something similar? Should I vibe code it and then ask for feedback here?
I tried this myself and I got āyouāre about 10-15% globallyā, which I think is a big underestimate.
For context, pp adjusted income is top 2%, I have a PhD (1% globally? less?), live alone in an urban area.
Asking more, a big factor pushing down is that I rent the place that I live in instead of owning it (which, donāt get me started on this from a personal finance perspective, but shouldnāt be that big of a gap I guess?).
I started, and then realised how complicated is to choose a set of variables and weights to make sense of āhow privileged am Iā or āhow lucky am Iā.
I have an MVP (but ran out of free LLM assistance), and right now the biggest downside is that if I include several variables, the results tend to be far from the top. And I donāt know what to do about this.
For instance, letās say that in āhealthcare accessā, having good public coverage puts you in the top 10% bracket (number made up). Then, if you pick 95% as the reference point for that any weighted average including this will miss on some distance to the top.
So just a weighted average of different questions is not good enough I guess.
I love the sentiment of the post, and tried it myself.
I think a prompt like this makes answers less extreme than what they actually are, because itās like a vibes-based answer instead of a model-based answer. I would be surprised if you are not in the top 1% globally.
I would really enjoy something like this but more model-based, as the GWWC calculator. Does anyone know of something similar? Should I vibe code it and then ask for feedback here?
I tried this myself and I got āyouāre about 10-15% globallyā, which I think is a big underestimate.
For context, pp adjusted income is top 2%, I have a PhD (1% globally? less?), live alone in an urban area.
Asking more, a big factor pushing down is that I rent the place that I live in instead of owning it (which, donāt get me started on this from a personal finance perspective, but shouldnāt be that big of a gap I guess?).
+1 on wanting a more model-based version of this.
And +1 to you vibe coding it!
Upon seeing this, I had the same thought about vibe coding a more model-based version ā¦ so, race you to whoever gets around to it?
I started, and then realised how complicated is to choose a set of variables and weights to make sense of āhow privileged am Iā or āhow lucky am Iā.
I have an MVP (but ran out of free LLM assistance), and right now the biggest downside is that if I include several variables, the results tend to be far from the top. And I donāt know what to do about this.
For instance, letās say that in āhealthcare accessā, having good public coverage puts you in the top 10% bracket (number made up). Then, if you pick 95% as the reference point for that any weighted average including this will miss on some distance to the top.
So just a weighted average of different questions is not good enough I guess.
We can discuss and workshop it if you want.
Hereās my attempt at percentile of job preference.