Talk:548: Kindle

2013-08-25T03:16:10Z

108.168.13.84:

I changed the explanation so that it refers to the device actually being the fictional, encyclopedic ''Guide'', not the novel. For one thing, the novel describes the ''Guide'' as essentially an e-book (despite being published in 1979). Mainly, having the novel on hand while traveling would not be of much use in the ways described, while access to the fictional encyclopedia would match the description exactly, just as it is used in the fictional franchise. [[User:Jerodast|- jerodast]] ([[User talk:Jerodast|talk]]) 23:53, 3 December 2012 (UTC) Where is the transcript? [[Special:Contributions/121.54.48.38|121.54.48.38]] 04:09, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

this was before. Wikipedia offline for android.

1252: Increased Risk

2013-08-16T13:03:09Z

108.168.13.84: attacked by dog -> sees dog with handgun

{{comic
| number = 1252
| date = August 16, 2013
| title = Increased Risk
| image = increased_risk.png
| titletext = You may point out that strictly speaking, you can use that statement to prove that all risks are tiny--to which I reply HOLY SHIT WATCH OUT FOR THAT DOG!
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete}}
The panel satirises the common misunderstanding of the concept of percentage. Quoting a percentage figure, without mentioning the base which this ratio acts on is meaningless (outside of arithmetic for arithmetic's sake). Most everyday communication however, succumbs to such incompleteness. In the aftermath of this ambiguity, people tend to conflate relative and absolute changes.

If the probability of a shark attack at the North beach is 0.000001 (one in a million), then the probability of shark attack at the South beach is still 0.0000012 (1.2 in a million). The difference between these values is not enough to normally justify choosing one beach over the other. [[Cueball]] parodies the concern by noting that by going a third time their chance of attack by dogs with handguns increases by 50%. If the chance of the dog attack is 0.000000001 (one in a billion) on each visit to the beach, then in after two visits the chance of attack is is about 0.000000002 whereas after three visits it becomes 0.000000003.

But this is also just a common misunderstanding on statistics, while they had no attacks at the first two visits the risk on this single trip is also only 0.000000001. The third visit doesn't increase the risk at this trip.

[[Beret Guy]] further misunderstands probability by believing that - since they haven't been attacked in their first two trips, the chance of attack by dogs with handguns is much higher on their third outing.

The title text discusses the argument that, if a tiny risk increased by 50% is still tiny, then since any probability can be reached by repeatedly increasing by 50%, then any probability is "tiny". [[Randall]] is about to debate this when he presumably sees a dog with a handgun.

==Transcript==
:Ponytail: We should go to the north beach. Someone said the south beach has a 20% higher risk of shark attacks.
:Cueball: Yeah, but statistically, taking three beach trips instead of two increases our odds of getting shot by a swimming dog carrying a handgun in its mouth by '''''50%!'''''
:Beret Guy: Oh no! This is our third trip!
:[Reminder: A 50% increase in a tiny risk is ''still tiny''.]

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Friday comics]]
[[Category:Comics from August]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Beret Guy]]
[[Category:Math]]

explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

Talk:548: Kindle

1252: Increased Risk