Okay, I picked out the invalid assumption before the paragraph, "It's noticeably bigger."
See if you can! :) #foresight #futuristhttps://twitter.com/St_Rev/status/991706653052604416 …
-
Show this thread
-
The answer is, of course, the assumption of stationarity. Stationarily means, in this context, that rates don't change over time. Under the model of stationarity, the odds per year of a violent revolution in the 1800s is identical to the odds this year.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likesShow this thread -
Of course, this isn't likely true. For instance, if you take the years 1750 to 1850 as the reference period, the probability of a violent revolution is 2% per year. In the next century, it's 0% per year. In the next century, it's (so far) 0% per year.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likesShow this thread -
Now in practice, we don't treat statistics like that, because it doesn't much make sense. A better model using internal data only is a logistic model, which would have the revolution rate be a stochastic variable that may change over time.
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likesShow this thread
St. Rev ☯️ 🏴 😻 Retweeted St. Rev ☯️ 🏴 😻
St. Rev ☯️ 🏴 😻 added,
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.