Talk:1252: Increased Risk - Revision history

Rereading xkcd at 23:40, 6 April 2020

2020-04-06T23:40:37Z

Hppavilion1: I think you'll find it's spelled "pædantic"

2016-10-07T05:12:51Z

I think you'll find it's spelled "pædantic"

Mumiemonstret at 12:09, 10 April 2015

2015-04-10T12:09:06Z

Davidy22 at 00:57, 14 June 2014

2014-06-14T00:57:52Z

Davidy22 at 00:55, 14 June 2014

2014-06-14T00:55:28Z

108.162.221.8 at 00:16, 14 June 2014

2014-06-14T00:16:05Z

199.27.128.87 at 10:27, 13 May 2014

2014-05-13T10:27:33Z

Dgbrt: Undo revision 47781 by Hoopy Frood (talk) Unsigned again.

2013-08-26T08:09:41Z

Undo revision 47781 by Hoopy Frood (talk) Unsigned again.

Hoopy Frood at 03:42, 26 August 2013

2013-08-26T03:42:09Z

Dgbrt: Holy shit, I do need a macro for this non signed posts.

2013-08-25T20:44:00Z

Holy shit, I do need a macro for this non signed posts.

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:40, 6 April 2020
Line 90:		Line 90:
	* ∃x:tiny(risk(x)) (which is also kind of reasonable, but entirely unsubstantiated).		* ∃x:tiny(risk(x)) (which is also kind of reasonable, but entirely unsubstantiated).
	Pedanticity complete. [[User:Hppavilion1\|Hppavilion1]] ([[User talk:Hppavilion1\|talk]]) 05:12, 7 October 2016 (UTC)		Pedanticity complete. [[User:Hppavilion1\|Hppavilion1]] ([[User talk:Hppavilion1\|talk]]) 05:12, 7 October 2016 (UTC)
		+
		+	I do love reading these discussions. Just wanted to add - don’t care about real-world probability, I would NOT set up an expectation like that if beret guy was coming to the beach with me. Who knows what might happen....[[User:Rereading xkcd\|Rereading xkcd]] ([[User talk:Rereading xkcd\|talk]]) 23:40, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:12, 7 October 2016
Line 85:		Line 85:

	Just a note, (may have been mentioned) the third trip has the same odds as trip one and two, the odds do not increase with past results (not that it matters with such low odds). {{unsigned ip\|108.162.221.8}}		Just a note, (may have been mentioned) the third trip has the same odds as trip one and two, the odds do not increase with past results (not that it matters with such low odds). {{unsigned ip\|108.162.221.8}}
		+
		+	...OK, this one has always bugged me. ∀x:tiny(risk(x)) only follows from tiny(risk(x)) → tiny(1.5*risk(x)) if we also assume:
		+	* x > y ∧ tiny(x) → tiny(y) (which is, honestly, a fairly reasonable axiom).
		+	* ∃x:tiny(risk(x)) (which is also kind of reasonable, but entirely unsubstantiated).
		+	Pedanticity complete. [[User:Hppavilion1\|Hppavilion1]] ([[User talk:Hppavilion1\|talk]]) 05:12, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:09, 10 April 2015
Line 12:		Line 12:

	I think it's worth mentioning that this comic doesn't [[985\|distinguish between percentages and percentage points]]. --[[User:DiEvAl\|DiEvAl]] ([[User talk:DiEvAl\|talk]]) 12:35, 16 August 2013 (UTC)		I think it's worth mentioning that this comic doesn't [[985\|distinguish between percentages and percentage points]]. --[[User:DiEvAl\|DiEvAl]] ([[User talk:DiEvAl\|talk]]) 12:35, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
		+	: I think it does. It never uses percentage points, and never claims to.[[User:Mumiemonstret\|Mumiemonstret]] ([[User talk:Mumiemonstret\|talk]]) 12:09, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

	Is it the case that doing something three times increases risk by 50% over two times inherently? I feel like this is the case, but it's early, here. Also, I'm not sure Randall is attacked by a dog, he may be using it as a diversion. I think that he's done this before. [[User:Theo\|Theo]] ([[User talk:Theo\|talk]]) 12:56, 16 August 2013 (UTC)		Is it the case that doing something three times increases risk by 50% over two times inherently? I feel like this is the case, but it's early, here. Also, I'm not sure Randall is attacked by a dog, he may be using it as a diversion. I think that he's done this before. [[User:Theo\|Theo]] ([[User talk:Theo\|talk]]) 12:56, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:57, 14 June 2014
Line 82:		Line 82:

	This paragraph does not specify the use of a fair coin. If 9 flips all come up heads, then there is strong statistical evidence that the probability of getting a head in a flip is not 50% (P=1/2^9=1/512~0.2%). It is still true that "past experience does not impact subsequent flips", but in this case, our judgment about the true probability should change in light of new data. [[Special:Contributions/199.27.128.87\|199.27.128.87]] 10:27, 13 May 2014 (UTC)		This paragraph does not specify the use of a fair coin. If 9 flips all come up heads, then there is strong statistical evidence that the probability of getting a head in a flip is not 50% (P=1/2^9=1/512~0.2%). It is still true that "past experience does not impact subsequent flips", but in this case, our judgment about the true probability should change in light of new data. [[Special:Contributions/199.27.128.87\|199.27.128.87]] 10:27, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
		+
	Just a note, (may have been mentioned) the third trip has the same odds as trip one and two, the odds do not increase with past results (not that it matters with such low odds). {{unsigned ip\|108.162.221.8}}		Just a note, (may have been mentioned) the third trip has the same odds as trip one and two, the odds do not increase with past results (not that it matters with such low odds). {{unsigned ip\|108.162.221.8}}

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:55, 14 June 2014
Line 82:		Line 82:

	This paragraph does not specify the use of a fair coin. If 9 flips all come up heads, then there is strong statistical evidence that the probability of getting a head in a flip is not 50% (P=1/2^9=1/512~0.2%). It is still true that "past experience does not impact subsequent flips", but in this case, our judgment about the true probability should change in light of new data. [[Special:Contributions/199.27.128.87\|199.27.128.87]] 10:27, 13 May 2014 (UTC)		This paragraph does not specify the use of a fair coin. If 9 flips all come up heads, then there is strong statistical evidence that the probability of getting a head in a flip is not 50% (P=1/2^9=1/512~0.2%). It is still true that "past experience does not impact subsequent flips", but in this case, our judgment about the true probability should change in light of new data. [[Special:Contributions/199.27.128.87\|199.27.128.87]] 10:27, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
−	Just a note, (may have been mentioned) the third trip has the same odds as trip one and two, the odds do not increase with past results (not that it matters with such low odds).	+	Just a note, (may have been mentioned) the third trip has the same odds as trip one and two, the odds do not increase with past results (not that it matters with such low odds). {{unsigned ip\|108.162.221.8}}

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:16, 14 June 2014
Line 82:		Line 82:

	This paragraph does not specify the use of a fair coin. If 9 flips all come up heads, then there is strong statistical evidence that the probability of getting a head in a flip is not 50% (P=1/2^9=1/512~0.2%). It is still true that "past experience does not impact subsequent flips", but in this case, our judgment about the true probability should change in light of new data. [[Special:Contributions/199.27.128.87\|199.27.128.87]] 10:27, 13 May 2014 (UTC)		This paragraph does not specify the use of a fair coin. If 9 flips all come up heads, then there is strong statistical evidence that the probability of getting a head in a flip is not 50% (P=1/2^9=1/512~0.2%). It is still true that "past experience does not impact subsequent flips", but in this case, our judgment about the true probability should change in light of new data. [[Special:Contributions/199.27.128.87\|199.27.128.87]] 10:27, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
		+	Just a note, (may have been mentioned) the third trip has the same odds as trip one and two, the odds do not increase with past results (not that it matters with such low odds).

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:27, 13 May 2014
Line 78:		Line 78:
	"Makes you wonder what the risk was for that Marlin coming on board that boat in Florida - http://www.wfla.com/story/23239959/350-pound-marlin-jumps-in-boat-landing-on-crew?"		"Makes you wonder what the risk was for that Marlin coming on board that boat in Florida - http://www.wfla.com/story/23239959/350-pound-marlin-jumps-in-boat-landing-on-crew?"
	I guess it all depends on your point of view. One might argue that the "gambler's fallacy" is the primary driver of lottery income, which, according to the North American Association of State and Provincial Lotteries: "During fiscal year 2012 (which for most jurisdictions ended June 30) U.S. lottery sales totaled $78 billion ($US). Canadian sales reached $9.3 billion ($Can)." (http://www.naspl.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=content&menuid=14&pageid=1020). Is "Remember to Play all Lottery Games Responsibly" an oxymoron?{{unsigned\|Hoopy}}		I guess it all depends on your point of view. One might argue that the "gambler's fallacy" is the primary driver of lottery income, which, according to the North American Association of State and Provincial Lotteries: "During fiscal year 2012 (which for most jurisdictions ended June 30) U.S. lottery sales totaled $78 billion ($US). Canadian sales reached $9.3 billion ($Can)." (http://www.naspl.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=content&menuid=14&pageid=1020). Is "Remember to Play all Lottery Games Responsibly" an oxymoron?{{unsigned\|Hoopy}}
		+
		+	I am troubled with this paragraph: "This also can be illustrated by coin flips: if one flips a coin 10 times in a row, no matter what the result of each previous flip is (even if it were nine heads in a row), the odds of getting heads on the next coin flip remains 50%. In other words, past experience does not impact subsequent flips."
		+
		+	This paragraph does not specify the use of a fair coin. If 9 flips all come up heads, then there is strong statistical evidence that the probability of getting a head in a flip is not 50% (P=1/2^9=1/512~0.2%). It is still true that "past experience does not impact subsequent flips", but in this case, our judgment about the true probability should change in light of new data. [[Special:Contributions/199.27.128.87\|199.27.128.87]] 10:27, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

@@ Line 77: / Line 77: @@
 "Or in our line of work, we worry (in MA) if the risk of cancer is 0.00002 but not if it is 0.00001 or less, which, as the base rate of cancer is around 40%, means that we're worried about a cancer incidence rate of 0.40002 but not 0.40001.  And one could almost argue that it'd be pretty hard to distinguish these two, and even that if we presented risks in this form to the general public, they might wonder why we're so concerned..."
 "Makes you wonder what the risk was for that Marlin coming on board that boat in Florida - http://www.wfla.com/story/23239959/350-pound-marlin-jumps-in-boat-landing-on-crew?"
-I guess it all depends on your point of view.  One might argue that the "gambler's fallacy" is the primary driver of lottery income, which, according to the North American Association of State and Provincial Lotteries: "During fiscal year 2012 (which for most jurisdictions ended June 30) U.S. lottery sales totaled $78 billion ($US). Canadian sales reached $9.3 billion ($Can)." (http://www.naspl.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=content&menuid=14&pageid=1020).  Is "Remember to Play all Lottery Games Responsibly" an oxymoron?
+I guess it all depends on your point of view.  One might argue that the "gambler's fallacy" is the primary driver of lottery income, which, according to the North American Association of State and Provincial Lotteries: "During fiscal year 2012 (which for most jurisdictions ended June 30) U.S. lottery sales totaled $78 billion ($US). Canadian sales reached $9.3 billion ($Can)." (http://www.naspl.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=content&menuid=14&pageid=1020).  Is "Remember to Play all Lottery Games Responsibly" an oxymoron?{{unsigned|Hoopy}}