For me, it may be that the toilet paper roll needs to have the open end away from the wall. I don’t want to reach under the roll to take a piece! That’s ludicrous!
That or my recent addiction to correcting people when they use “less” when they should use “fewer”
I have given up on “steep learning curve”. A learning curve is proficiency on the Y axis against time on the X. A steep learning curve indicates something that is learned very quickly. A shallow learning curve is something that takes a long time to master. See Ebbinghaus 1885.
I always view that one as meaning that you must learn a lot about something in a short amount of time in order to use it effectively, where shallow learning curve, in a positive context, would mean you can make it useful without knowing all that much about its full capabilities.
That’s my take too. Short for “this requires you to follow a steep learning curve, even if it is not easy to do so.”
Whatever that is, it’s not a learning curve. Ebbinghaus defined it in his classic work.
It’s learning over time, with proficiency being the area under the line. It’s describing having to learn a lot to achieve the same proficiency compared to something with a shallow learning curve.
Ebbinghaus didn’t integrate areas under the acquisition curve. He wasn’t a mathematical psychologist.
That’s a great point!
All these replies talking about graphs and I’m here imagining for years having to pedal up a steep hill requiring lots of effort like a pleb.
That’s where the confusion comes from, conflating the experience of walking up a steep hill vs an acquisition curve.