4 ms·
The fact that these very-smart people did not include ranges is absurd. They know that 11.7% is WAY too precise to report. The truth is it's probably somewhere
by iambateman 11mo ago
The fact that these very-smart people did not include ranges is absurd.
They know that 11.7% is WAY too precise to report. The truth is it's probably somewhere between 5-15% over the next 20 years and nobody has any idea which side of that range is correct.
- sciencegeek123 11mo agoYes, agree. There should be range. Similar precision appears in other exposure studies also. E.g. This one was trending from OpenAI and Wharton a short while back: arxiv.org/pdf/2303.10130