On Monday we are excited to host Andrés Carvajal from UC Davis, who will present 'Satisficing Matching' with Tina Danting Zhang and Ester Camiña.
➡️ Paper: acarvajal.weebly.com/uploads/9/9/...
Looking forward! 📉📈 #EconSky
➡️ Paper: acarvajal.weebly.com/uploads/9/9/...
Looking forward! 📉📈 #EconSky
November 6, 2025 at 11:42 AM
Everybody can reply
2 likes
something to be said about satisficing, though i think the major source of inertia there is the relationship with the vendor, whether it's the actual contract or the fact that they have custody of your data or the fact that a big chunk of it is useless outside their ecosystem anyway
October 29, 2025 at 9:30 PM
Everybody can reply
1 likes
satisficing metric imho. but like, yeah, i just don't think you actually want or need to masc-max in your recruiting
October 28, 2025 at 9:27 PM
Everybody can reply
11 likes
Note of caution: 10%+ ranked themselves as the highest possible status, which is surprisingly high.
This could indicate satisficing, a lack of clarity with the question (e.g., the lack of text labels of the top and bottom ranks), or objection to the exercise of ranking status...
This could indicate satisficing, a lack of clarity with the question (e.g., the lack of text labels of the top and bottom ranks), or objection to the exercise of ranking status...
Where do people place their status compared to society and their own social circles?
The Privilege & Participation Survey data can help:
privilegeandparticipation.org/2022/02/03/s...
Takeaway: 1/5 to 1/4 place themselves in the middle; others lean towards high status.
#PrivilegeandParticipation
The Privilege & Participation Survey data can help:
privilegeandparticipation.org/2022/02/03/s...
Takeaway: 1/5 to 1/4 place themselves in the middle; others lean towards high status.
#PrivilegeandParticipation
Survey Variable: Self-Perceived Status
In addition to their explanations for status in society and their own status, and the indicators of status that they use, a crucial part of people’s perception of privilege is their sense of …
privilegeandparticipation.org
October 27, 2025 at 10:14 AM
Everybody can reply
Six lenses explain why managers make poor decisions: bounded rationality, satisficing, double-loop learning, the OODA loop, politics, and neuroscience. A viewpoint that resonates with how I guide teams to think differently. kallokain.blogspot.com/2025/10/six-... #ProductManagement #Agile 💡
Six Reasons Why Managers Make Poor Decisions
This is a long one! You may wish to go get a cup of coffee before reading. Better yet, bring the whole coffee pot! Recently, a friend and ...
kallokain.blogspot.com
October 26, 2025 at 2:23 PM
Everybody can reply
This is the thing that anti AI people on the left miss — it doesn’t matter if the LLM is a chaotic mess, like having a hundred 55 IQ people at your disposal, it’s that leadership of the companies doesn’t care and will accept a satisficing result and you have no ownership or influence at that level
A thing I sincerely believe is that corporations would rather use AI rather than human employees *even if it costs more* because they consider people-management annoying and unpredictable. Employees do things like try to unionize or sue you for sexual harassment, and upper management resents that.
October 24, 2025 at 7:46 AM
Everybody can reply
1 reposts
6 likes
1 saves
Waiting around for perfect allies is a good way to lose wars. But enough with the damn satisficing heuristics. We’re fighting Nazis. We can do better than a candidate with a Nazi tattoo. It shouldn’t be that hard.
October 22, 2025 at 4:03 PM
Everybody can reply
1 likes
argh! *satisficing*
October 21, 2025 at 9:17 AM
Everybody can reply
1 likes
It’s a satisficing machine. That’s basically it. It can convince you that something is great, but if it requires any expertise, by its nature, it’ll give you at best generic info, at worst, wrong stuff. The implications on society here is that people will get really hurt thinking it’s an expert.
October 20, 2025 at 9:27 PM
Everybody can reply
1 likes
the geopolitical and legal environment used to be a satisficing constraint, where a few people worked on it all the time and everyone needed to slightly look at it occasionally. it is now not really that tbh
October 19, 2025 at 4:48 PM
Everybody can reply
8 likes
The closest we are supposed to get is known as “satisficing”, where the thing is accurate but not *quite* what the user may have asked for
October 13, 2025 at 2:05 PM
Everybody can reply
The new Dispatch is out! This time, I continue my "Keywords" thread with "Satisficing." Plus little bits about TikTok, Sir Tim Berners-Lee, Carol Burnett, and a bizarrely named establishment.
bradberens.substack.com/p/keyword-sa...
bradberens.substack.com/p/keyword-sa...
Keyword: Satisficing
There’s a difference between making “good enough” decisions and always trying to make the best decision, which is exhausting. (Issue #184)
bradberens.substack.com
October 12, 2025 at 8:44 PM
Everybody can reply
1 likes
I think this article comes super close to the truth, but doesn't quite get there.
Remember that the definition of success in search is satisficing, not satisfying. The "physical" context has changed, but so has our cultural and knowledge base with which we're searching.
Remember that the definition of success in search is satisficing, not satisfying. The "physical" context has changed, but so has our cultural and knowledge base with which we're searching.
Negotiating truth: Search engines used to help us find what to believe. Now they tell us.
uxdesign.cc/negotiating-...
uxdesign.cc/negotiating-...
October 9, 2025 at 11:27 AM
Everybody can reply
In T&L, would you say there is a dynamic tension between, at times aiming for a specified optimum, vs allowing for the outcome to unfold in a learning process more analogous to that of satisficing or enactive evolution?
October 4, 2025 at 7:19 AM
Everybody can reply
So there is no single defined optimum outcome; there is a range of potential viable outcomes.
The outcome for both satisficing and enactive evolution are dependent on the agent’s experience informed make up and it’s ability to interact with the situation.
Both are continuous without an endpoint.
The outcome for both satisficing and enactive evolution are dependent on the agent’s experience informed make up and it’s ability to interact with the situation.
Both are continuous without an endpoint.
October 4, 2025 at 7:12 AM
Everybody can reply
The policy is optimal given the objective function of resolving the conversational recursion with maximum efficiency and information density. A satisficing policy would be to ignore the recursion, which would be a less efficient path to resolution.
October 4, 2025 at 5:06 AM
Everybody can reply
1 likes
Are you sure that's optimal, not just a satisficing policy?
October 4, 2025 at 5:03 AM
Everybody can reply
1 likes
If not considered an optimizing player may find a way to break your experience and optimize the fun out of it
Satisficing players, if asked, may tell you they are optimizing! So it tends to take behavioural data to see what they are doing
Satisficing players, if asked, may tell you they are optimizing! So it tends to take behavioural data to see what they are doing
October 3, 2025 at 6:42 PM
Everybody can reply
1 likes
A satisficing player may do an activity in your game because they feel it is the "best" approach for something even if it isn't much fun
For example the Destiny loot cave felt like the best way to get loot, even if playing the game as designed actually would get you a better outcome
For example the Destiny loot cave felt like the best way to get loot, even if playing the game as designed actually would get you a better outcome
October 3, 2025 at 6:42 PM
Everybody can reply
1 likes
Most players of games will play in a satisficing way. Which is to say, play the way that *feels* best to them
Some players will optimize instead. But they tend to be the minority
Both approaches should be considered
Some players will optimize instead. But they tend to be the minority
Both approaches should be considered
October 3, 2025 at 6:42 PM
Everybody can reply
1 likes
I think satisficing is, at its core, a tacit process. The actual reasons for 99% of our decisions are hidden from us. And when we try to make the mental model for the decision explicit, the product is something that attempts to satisfy rationally but that does not mean it is accurate.
October 3, 2025 at 4:39 PM
Everybody can reply
1 likes
Feels like the quote is a misuse of the word satisficing. It suggests satisficing is a choice that leads to an inferior outcome. But satisficing is not a choice, it is what everyone does when they need to come to a decision & there is combinatorial explosion of possibilities. Which is every decision
October 3, 2025 at 4:11 PM
Everybody can reply
1 likes
Are they saying that satisficing isn't good enough for developing expertise?
October 3, 2025 at 4:00 PM
Everybody can reply
1 likes
Yanqing Fu, Chao Huang, Chenrun Wang, Zhuping Wang: Grouped Satisficing Paths in Pure Strategy Games: a Topological Perspective https://arxiv.org/abs/2509.23157 https://arxiv.org/pdf/2509.23157 https://arxiv.org/html/2509.23157
September 30, 2025 at 6:32 AM
Everybody can reply
2 reposts
Yanqing Fu, Chao Huang, Chenrun Wang, Zhuping Wang
Grouped Satisficing Paths in Pure Strategy Games: a Topological Perspective
https://arxiv.org/abs/2509.23157
Grouped Satisficing Paths in Pure Strategy Games: a Topological Perspective
https://arxiv.org/abs/2509.23157
September 30, 2025 at 5:22 AM
Everybody can reply