5 ms·
That's ridiculous. That's like saying someone who wins the lottery is clairvoyant with P=0.00. I mean they got the exact right numbers which had 1 in 147 mill
by codeonfire 11y ago
That's ridiculous. That's like saying someone who wins the lottery is clairvoyant with P=0.00. I mean they got the exact right numbers which had 1 in 147 million chance, right?
- exgrv 11y agoA lot of people play the lottery. Only one person did this experiment. When you test multiple hypothesis (as in your lottery example), you need to perform a correction[2,3]. [1] https://xkcd.com/882/ https://xkcd.com/882/ [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiple_comparisons_problem https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiple_comparisons_problem [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bonferroni_correction https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bonferroni_correction
- swsieber 11y agoThat's totally different. They didn't test a whole bunch of people a whole bunch of times. That's what the lottery is. That's different math.
- codeonfire 11y agoHow do I know that? I just assume the guy that won was the only guy that played. If we can forget about all the people who ever claimed to smell disease, then we can forget about all the other lotto players.
- oldmanjay 11y agoWhat I find amusing here is the only intellectually honest way you have out of the logic hole you've dug is to claim that you understand neither the lottery, nor the article, which then makes your opinion on either uninformed and not terribly compelling. Were you just advocating for the devil?