2 ms·

I guess what’s missing is the denominator. How many Boeing whistleblowers are there? It’s a nice little math problem. Let’s say both of the whistleblowers were

I guess what’s missing is the denominator. How many Boeing whistleblowers are there? It’s a nice little math problem. Let’s say both of the whistleblowers were age 50. The probability of a 50 year old man dying in a year is 0.6%. So the probability of 2 or more of them dying in a year is 1 - (the probability of exactly zero dying in a year + the probability of exactly one dying in a year). 1 - (A+B). A is (1-0.006)^N. B is 0.006N(1-0.006)^(N-1). At 60 A is about 70% and B is about 25% making it statistically insignificant. But they died in the same 2 month period, so that 0.006 should be 0.001. If you rerun the same calculation, it’s 356.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
mulmen 3y ago
You are ignoring literally every other variable, especially the ones that are likely common to whistleblowers in general, Boeing employees in general, and Boeing whistleblowers in particular. Characteristics like having spent a career building airplanes surrounded by all kinds of mechanical and chemical hazards. Whistleblowing itself is extremely stressful for the attention it draws, the personal and professional relationships it strains, the media attention and of course the rampant speculation of assassination. Does personal health influence the psychology of a whistleblower? If you get a terminal diagnosis would you be more likely to spill the beans?
- janalsncm 3y ago
  That’s why I said the denominator is important. If you hit a home run on your first at bat it doesn’t mean you can bat 1000 the whole season. On the other hand, the more variables you add the more variance you’ll get. Actuarial tables use deaths per 100k. To my knowledge there haven’t been 100k Boeing whistleblowers.
  - mulmen 3y ago
    Why would there need to be 100k whistleblowers? That’s not how actuarial tables work. They’re normalized to a population of 100k, that doesn’t mean they’re derived from a population of 100k. Yes, reality is complex and messy and confusing and we often don’t have data to describe it. That’s why it’s important to know when we are dealing with relevant facts and when we are constructing a spherical cow out of scraps in their absence.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

mulmen 3y ago

You are ignoring literally every other variable, especially the ones that are likely common to whistleblowers in general, Boeing employees in general, and Boeing whistleblowers in particular. Characteristics like having spent a career building airplanes surrounded by all kinds of mechanical and chemical hazards. Whistleblowing itself is extremely stressful for the attention it draws, the personal and professional relationships it strains, the media attention and of course the rampant speculation of assassination. Does personal health influence the psychology of a whistleblower? If you get a terminal diagnosis would you be more likely to spill the beans?

janalsncm 3y ago
That’s why I said the denominator is important. If you hit a home run on your first at bat it doesn’t mean you can bat 1000 the whole season. On the other hand, the more variables you add the more variance you’ll get. Actuarial tables use deaths per 100k. To my knowledge there haven’t been 100k Boeing whistleblowers.
- mulmen 3y ago
  Why would there need to be 100k whistleblowers? That’s not how actuarial tables work. They’re normalized to a population of 100k, that doesn’t mean they’re derived from a population of 100k. Yes, reality is complex and messy and confusing and we often don’t have data to describe it. That’s why it’s important to know when we are dealing with relevant facts and when we are constructing a spherical cow out of scraps in their absence.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]