Cover image credit: “Question” by kevin dooley is licensed under CC BY 2.0.

Here’s a curated selection¹ of the comments and questions shared by readers of this blog so far.

Q: I wasn’t aware of the factorial operator until I read about it in your blog post. Are there other such examples in Math whose verbose description is humongous?
A: Indeed, Math is full of such operators. In fact, it wouldn’t be an exaggeration to say that Math specializes in creating very succinct descriptions of verbose operations or quantities. Even the everyday numbers you take for granted is a shorthand notation. Take, for example, the number 1,234 – it really is a succinct way of expressing the quantity resulting from doing the following operations: 1 multiplied by 1,000, added to 2 multiplied by 100, added to 3 multiplied by 10, added to 4 multiplied by 1.

C: I really liked the visualization of Net Worth (NW) as a scale. It’s much easier to grasp than the mathematical formulae for this all-important quantity!
R: Thank you, we’re glad you find the visualization helpful! In upcoming posts, we’ll build upon this visualization to show how NW evolves over time, so stay tuned.

C: Your exposition of how needs & wants can be visualized on a reqs spectrum makes so much more sense to me than the traditional division into the needs/wants categories and seems less judgemental, e.g., trying to justify an expensive purchase to my partner as a “need”, and not a “want”!
R: Thank you! We agree that the needs/wants dichotomy is an oversimplification that doesn’t reflect reality. On the other hand, the framework of the reqs spectrum explicitly recognizes the lack of a clear dividing line between needs & wants as well as their dynamic nature, which is not only closer to reality, but can also lead to less judgement.

Feel free to write to us to share your thoughts, questions, comments, and any other reactions on any of this site content by sending an email to player1 [AT] aplaystudio [DOT] com