videophile

92 ms·

1.
by videophile 17y ago
Bad example. The whole discussion is about reporting percentages of percentages. Look, it's pretty clear that hackers have left the building and let marketroids rush in. Feel free to use your ill-defined metric. If you have the least bit of
2.
by videophile 17y ago
Values reported as percentages should generally be values between 0 and 100. So when the real conversion rate goes from 0.002% to 10%, the reported number should not be 499900%. I expect hackers to use metrics that are at least defined over
3.
by videophile 17y ago
>take note of the "wtf is this guy talking about" downvotes you've received on this thread I don't rely on opinion-polling to determine who is right, esp. when it comes to questions related to science. >conversation with anyone else
4.
by videophile 17y ago
An equally valid question to ask is: "How many users are bouncing away from that website after landing on the first page?" That raw rate improved by 5.2%. When you quote percentages of percentages, the rates vary widely depending on your po
5.
by videophile 17y ago
>what is the standard deviation in that example...You need sample sizes to even attempt to do the math. First, you're asking the wrong person to supply the missing data. The onus is on the OP to justify their stats, not on the person ca
6.
by videophile 17y ago
The improvement in the conversion rate is (29.6 - 24.4) = 5.2%. Reporting "a percent of a percent" is downright misleading because it is entirely dependent on the starting baseline and also because conversion rates have high natural varianc
7.
by videophile 17y ago
There is some "New Math" being invoked here. If the conversion rate goes from 24.4% to 29.6%, it's disingenuous to claim a 21.2% improvement. I stopped at the first misuse of statistics, but by that point, they had taken out informative lin
8.
by videophile 17y ago
Ok, I'm not a PC-nazi but I think someone needs to call the article out: This is generic claptrap ("use help"?! he, and it's pretty clear it's a he, could have at least looked at how hard emacs help is to use for beginners) interspersed wit
9.
Why traditional video hosting is such an expensive proposition.(blog.flixq.com)
2 points by videophile 17y ago|0 comments
10.
Why YouTube is Expensive, or Slow, or Both.(blog.flixq.com)
3 points by videophile 17y ago|0 comments