The original premise was me arguing against Nate Silver's argument (via @slatestarcodex) for the value of voting.
-
-
Replying to @St_Rev
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.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @St_Rev
Silver requires an argument over the whole population to get a numerator big enough to motivate the act of voting.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
But if you argue over the whole population, you're making a claim to knowledge that no one has, absent a book of prophecy.
12:53 PM - 17 Oct 2016
0 replies
0 retweets
0 likes
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.