Originally published at: https://boingboing.net/2018/10/24/stats-cards-on-the-table.html
…
7 Likes
Back in the day, a friend of mine was on the rifle team at Monkey Blair.
3 Likes
The open-source nature of this is really interesting. As someone who abandoned 538 & Nate Silver completely after 2016, can anyone tell me if he’s made any significant changes to his models?
4 Likes
Wow, they ran their simulation 10,000,00010,000,000 times? That’s more than a jillion!
2 Likes
Yes and no. The 538 model has undergone a lot of changes, mostly around disseminating statistics to the general audience. That said, 538 still seems very naive when it comes to voter suppression tactics, vote hacking (ie. redshift), etc…
4 Likes
Statistics. Probability. And… random selection… by a chicken playing… “bingo.”
1 Like
Was 538 actually wrong in 2016, though? I seem to remember Trump having something like a 20% chance of winning, toward the end of it. One out of five isn’t impossible, people. Things that are only 20% likely happen ALL. THE. TIME. I think our biggest issue is that people don’t understand statistics and probabilities all that well, as they think 80% is the same as 100%. They are not the same values.
1 Like
Not at all, 538 was actually pretty damn accurate. Remember, Clinton won by 3m votes.
2 Likes
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
