The wisdom of the crowds is eerily accurate when there are lots of independent samples. Keyword, independent. As soon as each of the samples are aware of each other, or, the number of independent samples proves to not actually be that high, it falls apart pretty quickly.
I’m not sure I get your comment… I learned that crossing different official and reliable sources was the best way to get most of any information bit. Taking the overlapping information as the most reliable one.
Care to simplify what you’re meaning, so even stupid me can understand?
not weirdly enough - I saw the exact same video yesterday, assumed it had been in circulation for a while, and decided to steal his knowledge as my own and presented here like I’m a stats expert
How so?
You hear 2 biased self serving lies, the truth is unrelated to both lies. Thinking about averaging is a very one dimensional thinking.
Read their username
The wisdom of the crowds is eerily accurate when there are lots of independent samples. Keyword, independent. As soon as each of the samples are aware of each other, or, the number of independent samples proves to not actually be that high, it falls apart pretty quickly.
I’m not sure I get your comment… I learned that crossing different official and reliable sources was the best way to get most of any information bit. Taking the overlapping information as the most reliable one.
Care to simplify what you’re meaning, so even stupid me can understand?
Thank you !
Weirdly enough, VSauce just put out a short on this a couple of days ago.
not weirdly enough - I saw the exact same video yesterday, assumed it had been in circulation for a while, and decided to steal his knowledge as my own and presented here like I’m a stats expert
Two independent sources have corroborated the same information. Thus it is factual.