Nothing new, but a nice piece on both survivorship bias and on the concept of luck:
http://youarenotsosmart.com/2013/05/...ivorship-bias/
Disagreement welcome
Survivorship Bias
Nothing new, but a nice piece on both survivorship bias and on the concept of luck:
http://youarenotsosmart.com/2013/05/...ivorship-bias/
Disagreement welcome
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
Interesting read, but the issue is rather obvious to anyone who knows basic statistics: in order to figure out the cause of x, you must include observations on different values of x. If x is dichotomous, you must include observations where x is 1 and where x is 0. To use the restaurant example, in order to see what makes a good restaurant, you need to include observations of both successful and unsuccessful restaurants.
Hope is the denial of reality
Indeed, and I think the implication is that, in everyday life, the average person is not very good with basic statistics
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
No, they're not. They're also terrible at probability (on which statistics is based I suppose).
Hope is the denial of reality
All we know of the past passes through a million, million filters, and a great deal is never recorded or is tossed aside to make room for something more interesting or beautiful or audacious. All we will learn from history reaches us from the stories that, for whatever reason, survived.
Auto-biographies, journals, letters. Art, music, poetry, literature. Photos, videos, movies. Those are the cultural treasures that will be left behind, buried and forgotten, common things that lose its shiny pretty fast in the modern world. Resurfacing again like archaeological discoveries, finding their way into museums, special exhibits -- subjects of new biographies, novels, song lyrics, photos, movies, artwork.
Is there a mathematical formula or statistical analysis to explain that human phenomenon?
Has this been posted already here:Originally Posted by Loki
I can't remember, but I think it's worth posting twice anyway.
"Wer Visionen hat, sollte zum Arzt gehen." - Helmut Schmidt
I had this exact conversation with someone about the lottery last week. I really don't understand why people can't get this concept.
Which concept do you mean? That it is waste of money, or that it is a strange way of entertainment.
"Wer Visionen hat, sollte zum Arzt gehen." - Helmut Schmidt
Expected utility = utility of obtaining an object * probability of obtaining it. With very few exceptions, you shouldn't pay more for something when that cost is higher than the expected utility of buying it. Therefore, lottery tickets = bad.
Hope is the denial of reality
I guess the shuts and giggles theory never appealed to you?
Someone eventually wins the big one and lots of smaller prize winners as well, so I like the idea of piddling couple of bucks with my friends (my gaming group) every week. So why not?
Brevior saltare cum deformibus viris est vita
Because that money could be used more productively elsewhere? Even if that's just getting an extra beer.
Some food for thought:
"Government statistics (http://hazmat.dot.gov/riskmgmt/riskcompare.htm) show there are about 1.7 automobile caused fatalities for every 100,000,000 vehicle-miles. If you drive one mile to the store to buy your Mega Millions ticket and then return home, you have driven two miles. Thus the probability that you will join this statistical group is 2 x 1.7 / 100,000,000 = 0.000000034. This can also be stated as “One in 29,411,765-”. Thus, if you drive to the store to buy your Mega Millions ticket, your chance of being killed (or killing someone else) is nearly 6 times greater than the chance that you will win the Mega Millions Jackpot."
Hope is the denial of reality
That's why the one or two times I contributed to the office lotto pool, I never volunteered to be the one actually getting the tickets.
Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"
its why i walk to the kwik-e-mart
"In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."
You can just give me $10 for which I'll give you back $5.
Hope is the denial of reality
That wouldn't have provided me with my social-participation credits. Cheaper than buying a round of drinks at a bar.
Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"
Would telling the rest of the office that they're stupid get you those credits?
Hope is the denial of reality
I don't want another beer the calories kill me (and I don't care for beer$
Brevior saltare cum deformibus viris est vita
I don't play the lottery but I know people who do - even intelligent people. It is a form of enabled escapism. They KNOW its very very very very very unlikely to win but since it is a non-zero chance they can justify day dreaming what it would be like to win the top prize. Now of course they can day dream without playing the lottery but by actually having that insignificant chance to have it be a reality it seems less silly.
Its funny you suggest getting an extra beer which in some cases might actually significantly increase the odds of a deadly car crash then going out to pick up a lotto ticket.
Always drink responsibly.
Hope is the denial of reality
Would telling the rest of the office that they're stupid get you those credits?
Telling people they're stupid generally loses you social credits.
Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"
Speak truth to power.
So, how lonely are you?
Brevior saltare cum deformibus viris est vita
Nice article.
The Russians know this.
Probably because unlike most Americans, Russians don't stop learning math after covering the multiplication table.
Hope is the denial of reality
Wow, that lonely...what are the odds, oops...never mind. (:
Brevior saltare cum deformibus viris est vita
"Enabled escapism"?
Lewk, people who drive to their local mall cinema, and pay $12 to watch a new release, or 3-D movie, are playing the same risk-to-benefit ratios as lottery ticket buyers. Only difference is what 'thrill' they're willing to pay for.
In reality, it makes less economic sense to buy a $12 movie ticket than a $2 lottery ticket.
Now I'm trying to figure what you are arguing with Lewk about.
Brevior saltare cum deformibus viris est vita
Lewk placed lottery ticket buyers in the same category as movie ticket buyers. ie, 'wasting' their money.
As Fuzzy said, some social credibility is lost by telling people they're stupid for how they spend their entertainment dollars.
Um, you actually get something for those $12 that you otherwise can't get (a chance to watch the movies several months before they're on DVD). You gain nothing from buying a lottery ticket. For every dollar you pay, you're literally throwing away 50 cents. I somehow doubt that people are paying that money just for the "thrill" (along with the inevitable disappointment)."Enabled escapism"?
Lewk, people who drive to their local mall cinema, and pay $12 to watch a new release, or 3-D movie, are playing the same risk-to-benefit ratios as lottery ticket buyers. Only difference is what 'thrill' they're willing to pay for.
In reality, it makes less economic sense to buy a $12 movie ticket than a $2 lottery ticket.
Hope is the denial of reality
They're paying a few bucks for the "thrill" of an unexpected (and mathematically unlikely) win. Sure, it's using a form of gambling as entertainment. Similar to Bingo at firehalls or church raffles. Not quite the same as Casino gambling tables. Just ask that 82 year old woman who won the $590 Million jackpot at a Publix grocery store check-out line.
*BTW, I've paid $12 to watch movies 'known' to be B-rated, immediate box-office 'flops', in a theater atmosphere with great acoustics. Nothing related to catching it before DVD release.
Last edited by GGT; 06-09-2013 at 09:07 PM.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote