Will my Mathematics eBook, "Probability for Lemurs" have a total of more than 100 readers by the end of April, 2022?

156

Ṁ3.1K

resolved Mar 23

Resolved

YES

ALL

The number of readers shows up on the landing page below the book cover on the left, I'm currently at 10 as of first posting this. Here is a free code for Manifold users: https://leanpub.com/probabilityforlemurs/c/6OMiYNaqgAj6_manifold * I'm a first time author, to quote another person on Manifold, I'm basically just some jabroni. * Like many on Manifold, I have an interest in predictions, which means Probability Theory can play a role. However I often find it difficult to deeply grok probabilistic concepts and end up making emotional decisions the vast majority of the time. "Probability for Lemurs," is my effort to explain Probability Theory from primitives with the hope of helping people internalize concepts better and make better decisions. * I'm promoting it on Twitter, Linkedin, my social networks, etc. * Vote NO to subsidize the market.

Get Ṁ200 play money

🏅 Top traders

#	Name	Total profit
1		Ṁ179
2		Ṁ172
3		Ṁ35
4		Ṁ16
5		Ṁ11

17 Comments

42 Trades

Sort by:

bought Ṁ1 of YES

Wow, congrats! I've never been happier to lose M$ 100 😁

bought Ṁ599 of YES

I'm at 92 readers now after having submitted to HackerNews, thanks @Undox. I'm having to dump all of the rest of my remaining $M into this now because it's a virtual certainty that this is going to happen...whereas when I made this bet originally I had no idea if I would be able to even get 10 readers. I'm going to have to roll this market over into a higher number and would like to have a higher amount of $M left over to be able to kickstart that market in turn.

bought Ṁ1 of NO

Just submitted again on Hackernews here @Undox : https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30768109

bought Ṁ1 of NO

@Undox ok will do

bought Ṁ1 of YES

@PatrickDelaney with HN it is OK to submit again if it is not successful, although probably good to wait maybe 2 or so days.

bought Ṁ1 of NO

Here is the actual HackerNews Thread, thanks for the suggestion @Martin: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30735817

bought Ṁ10 of NO

I put together a Show HN: article linking to my book with a free code. https://leanpub.com/probabilityforlemurs/c/gv9B4Xz0jpq1_hackernews

bought Ṁ1 of NO

I'm at 25 readers as of this morning.

bought Ṁ1 of NO

I'm up to 22 readers now, so 22% of the way there.

bought Ṁ1 of NO

@Martin OK I will work on putting something together.

bought Ṁ1 of NO

@Isaac King - thank you, very good notes. I had reorganized the chapters at one point and moved Expected Value way to the back because I saw it more in line with making a prediction rather than it being a parameter. Originally I had this book organized like a traditional textbook, but one of the points I would like to drive through is the, "workflow" of using probability to make a prediction, meaning, you 1) Calculate Parameters then 2) Find relationships between Sets and finally 3) Then and only then, make predictions, which involve a value and a relationship statement. Part of this is because there is such a huge ongoing trend in wanting to make predictions, gain more certainty over the future, work higher end jobs leveraging statistical computing and machine learning, etc. - so I'm thinking there are a lot of folks out there who want probability described from yet another standpoint. That being said, if I have just repeated what has already been said, then I have failed. On the bright side, with LeanPub I can just clean it up and release a new version of the book. In most textbooks, Expected Value is taught way at the beginning, I think because it's, "easier" and perhaps there isn't a lot of thought put into the workflow I have described above. What it sounds like I should do is comb through and remove references to Expected Value earlier on in the book. I could also certainly clean up any technical terms like that as well...not sure if you had any other ones you identified?

bought Ṁ1 of NO

@Austin thank you!

bought Ṁ1 of YES

Maybe share on Hacker News?

bought Ṁ1 of NO

I like the idea, but I think this book is too technical to serve as a good introduction to probability theory. Skimming the book, it looks like you've replaced traditional variable names with bananas, but the actual explanations of the concepts are not significantly simpler than in a traditional textbook. It also uses many technical terms like "expected value" without having previously explained what they mean, and just assumes the reader will already know.

bought Ṁ100 of NO

Just bought a copy! And this is my subsidy (+ subscription to updates)

bought Ṁ1 of NO

@Martin - any thoughts on where else to share it?

bought Ṁ100 of YES

I think sharing a book about probability here will be popular. Even for the established stats people.

Related questions

Related questions

🏅 Top traders

Related questions

Related questions