3 ms·
I meant it was mundane in the way that any stat new grad could have come up with this methodology. If you give anyone 5 seconds to come up with a methodology t
by ergocoder 4y ago
I meant it was mundane in the way that any stat new grad could have come up with this methodology.
If you give anyone 5 seconds to come up with a methodology to check for bot, they would probably come up with "yeah, let's sample 100 of our followers and check manually".
It is the most obvious simplest method that it surprises me twitter can even call this trade secret under NDA.
- HWR_14 4y agoHere's an example of something more obvious. We have a new finance grad. He comes up with the methodology of "let's take all the corporate profit for the quarter, divide it by the outstanding shares, and distribute it". It's a bit simple, but it's fine. However, if you know that comes out to $7.22/share and announce that ahead of the announcement, you would breach your NDA. It's just a stupid number, but it means something. Similarly, the fact that Twitter used 100, instead of 1000 or 2700 gives you error bars. It means something. Semi-unrelated: a new stat grad would almost certainly not choose 100. They would feel compelled to run some math and come up with a different sample size that matched the results of some equations for power analysis, etc.
- ergocoder 4y agoParag just went on a long twitter thread basically saying that this is not their approach of checking for bots. So, I guess it is not that mundane.