Google| Subject | Re: Colonial Photo & Hobby |
| From | Eric Stevens |
| Date | 04/19/2014 00:05 (04/19/2014 10:05) |
| Message-ID | <rn73l95hbg74844fgcmg5hblckvknhd8ov@4ax.com> |
| Client | |
| Newsgroups | rec.photo.digital |
| Follows | Sandman |
| Followups | nospam (1h & 35m) Sandman (22h & 53m) > Eric Stevens |
On 18 Apr 2014 11:25:15 GMT, Sandman <mr@sandman.net>wrote:
SandmanPoor analogy. Actually it's like you visiting me 24 times and one time finding me with a headache. You could then conclude 'Eric Stevens has headaches'. The mathematics gets more complicated if you want to calculate the odds on me having a headache on any given day but no one has tried to do the equivalent of that in the example of the camera store.
In article <una1l95fqodlib0kd8sbp5vn0pcd9jqtpm@4ax.com>, Eric Stevens wrote:SandmanWhich would be statistically worthless even if we were only talking about one store, which we weren't.Eric Stevens
Why would it be statistically worthless even for the one store at which the data was gathered?
Because it is only one data point. It's like I would ask you if you're feeling good and you complain about a headache and then I use this to conclude that you suffer from headaches 100% of the time.
You are inventing that. He actually said (and note the first paragraph):SandmanEric StevensSandmanYou mean, other than his explicit claim about: "I'd estimate that in somewhere around half the visits", which means that he has at least visited enough stores for a number of them being "about half", which puts it roughly in at least around ten stores (4/10 is "about half"), so he already has ten times as much statistical data than you (i.e. infintaely more, since you have none).Eric Stevens
Do you really call an estimate "statistical data"?
Do you really think it can't be?
An estimate with some hard numbers behind it, including error data and an acceptable estimate of probability might be regarded as statistical data. Without that kind of support, it's just a guess.
No, it's not just a guess. It had some hard data behind it, it's just that nospam couldn't remember the actual numbers,
"there were way more than 24 cameras on display at the best buys i've been at and i didn't check every single camera to see if every single one was functional, therefore any numbers you pull from your ass are going to be incorrect (not that there was any doubt).
there were probably 4-5 slrs (don't remember) and i only looked at slrs and of those, just nikon and canon. i don't know (nor care) how many of the compacts were functional but based on my experience, there were likely to be several that had one problem or another.
i'd estimate that in somewhere around half the visits, there is at least one problem camera on display, either visually, such as missing a lens or otherwise obviously broken, or something wrong in actual testing, such as with a dead battery or otherwise non-functional."
so based on memory, ...The memory about which he wrote "(don't remember)"?
he estimated them to be something close to what they were.Nope. He just estimated them. He had no way of knowing what they actually were. --
Regards,
Eric Stevens
04/14/2014-
