5 ms·
I have to brag here. I silently visualized a wall clock ticking off the seconds and got 60.02 seconds. 2 hundredths of a second off from reality! I could try
by function_seven 5y ago
I have to brag here. I silently visualized a wall clock ticking off the seconds and got 60.02 seconds.
2 hundredths of a second off from reality!
I could try it again to validate, but I can't be bothered. As far as I'm concerned, I'm super accurate judging the passage of time. No need to find out if it was a lucky random pick in the interval [58, 62] :)
- pugworthy 5y ago60.38s for me, which also surprised me. But the real surprise was just how close a lot of people get. I was fully expecting a bell curve that was offset high or low due to some imagined bias people would have to count fast or slow.
- mannykannot 5y agoUnless you try it again, we have no quantitative basis for estimating your variance. You can brag all you like, but I'm not listening.
- function_seven 5y agoOk, I just did it again right now. This result was 59.48s. I'm going to acknowledge that result as an outlier, exclude it from my analysis, and stick with my median result of 60.02.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- fho 5y ago$ np.median([59.48, 60.02]) 59.75 $ stats.median_abs_deviation([59.48, 60.02]) 0.27 ;-)