The original premise was me arguing against Nate Silver's argument (via @slatestarcodex) for the value of voting.
Voting to personal interest does not have this flaw! But then you're taking a 1 in 10 million shot at winning 5000 bucks or w/e.
-
-
Silver requires an argument over the whole population to get a numerator big enough to motivate the act of voting.
-
But if you argue over the whole population, you're making a claim to knowledge that no one has, absent a book of prophecy.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
. Banned in Sweden. SubGenius, Zhuangist, white-hat troll. Defrocked mathematician. Brain problems.