4 ms·
They did not sample three times and win once. They sampled three million times and won once. Hardly "one data point."
by soyiuz 9y ago
They did not sample three times and win once. They sampled three million times and won once. Hardly "one data point."
- dfee 9y agoI believe “one data point” referred to one winning, not three plays.
- Nomentatus 9y agoIt still falls under "one swallow does not make a summer" - even though a lot of days of winter preceeded that bird sighting.
- s0rce 9y agoThat is one datapoint - one death.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- mabbo 9y agoThe point remains: it isn't fair to decide what the probability is with only one data point on one side- especially for rare events. Would it have been fair if Uber last week were to declare that they have a 0% probability of pedestrian deaths, since they'd never had one yet? The goal of these statistics is to predict future outcomes. But with such a small data sample, you cannot fairly predict the future- just as in my lottery example.
- soyiuz 9y agoIt would be fair to approximate it was near zero per however number of miles they drove, just as it is fair to approximate it is one per three million miles today. Think of it the other way, we know with a high degree of certainty the fatalities are not one per mile, for example.
- ggg9990 9y agoWhat if Uber’s first self-driving car killed a cyclist in its very first mile of operation? Would you find it equally hard to draw conclusions?