Quotes About Analysis

We're sort of in an age now when we have too much information, which can take us down a specific path. You're getting too much information too quickly to be able to slow it down and parse it out.

I would say in just about every investigation we have, there will be differences of opinion, where you have partial facts, as to what those facts mean.

I don't think that somebody who is observing or predicting behavior should also be participating in the 'experiment.'

Acting can be a narrow and isolated experience, because you only examine your particular part.

There's a lot of hand-wringing going on about the death of journalism and particularly the death of investigative journalism. What I see is that there is more need than ever to have experienced information processors - people who can look through this mass of data.

When I make a movie, I don't break it down and analyze it. I could but it would get in the way of doing a job - on instinct based on all the research we did going in. you want to trust yourself and your director and your acting partners in the circumstances you're shooting. I don't like to have any kind of overview.

Divide each difficulty into as many parts as is feasible and necessary to resolve it.

We must admit that history is enjoyable to a large extent because it enables us to pass judgement on the past.

If you have read me for any length of time, you know I am less than enthralled with much of what passes for financial news.

It's night by night, just figuring out watching film on different passes I can make, and the ball will find you and it comes back to you, but it opens up the floor for other guys too.

Even if one is interested only in one's own society, which is one's prerogative, one can understand that society much better by comparing it with others.

95% of penny stocks are junk. I show you how to find the other 5%, and do it all without bribes or vested interests. Just good quality companies.

Instead of Freud's famous Interpretation of Dreams it is a book of dreams that interprets us.

If you don't study any companies, you have the same success buying stocks as you do in a poker game if you bet without looking at your cards.

Here are some pointers from this section: • Understand the nature of the companies you own and the specific reasons for holding the stock. ("It is really going up!" doesn't count.) • By putting your stocks into categories you'll have a better idea of what to expect from them.

This is one of the keys to successful investing: focus on the companies, not on the stocks.

Real cognitive science, however, is necessarily based on experimental investigation of actual humans or animals. We will leave that for other books, as we assume the reader has only a computer for experimentation.

There is a detailed breakdown by

Steele: So I guess there's lessons there—the lesson I should have drawn is there may be more than one bug here and I should have looked harder the first time. But another lesson is that if a bug is thought to be rare, then looking at rarely executed paths may be fruitful. And a third thing is, having good documentation about what the algorithm is trying to do, namely a reference back to Knuth, was just great.

nobody seemed to think programming is a solved problem: most are still looking for a better way to write software, whether by finding ways to automatically analyze code, coming up with better ways for programmers to work together, or finding (or designing) better programming languages.

Critics search for ages for the wrong word, which, to give them credit, they eventually find.

I have found it helpful to ask not 'In what circumstances is a plank a part of a ship?' but, rather, 'In what circumstances do planks compose (add up to, form) something?

You have to have more leadership, less management. It's about getting stuff done, you can sit around and analyze things forever but while you do that the competition has moved on.

People put a lot less effort into picking apart evidence that confirms what they already believe.