There is no Wall Street scandal that resulted from people rounding numbers up instead of down, you don't understand what you're talking about and are not qualified to discuss it
-
-
I said nothing about rounding up or down, just rounding. But in fact rounding up has been a problem. And then you speak of qualifications...! Quite the multilayered gaslighting operation you've got going. One quick example for your reference:https://www.cnbc.com/2018/06/22/sec-investigates-whether-companies-round-up-earnings.html …
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Well that's a fun fact I didn't know, and that I kind of doubt you knew until you googled it just now to own me What of it
3 replies 1 retweet 7 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @Aya62335284 and
Note that this fun paper - which is indeed a cool paper - jokes about the term "quadrophobia", fear of the number four It is arguing that earnings reports improperly round up rather than down when the digit in question is 4, rather than 5 or higher
1 reply 1 retweet 12 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @Aya62335284 and
It does NOT say that the SEC should ban the concept of rounding altogether in earnings reports and they should be printed with as many significant digits as the paper will hold Because that's absurd
2 replies 1 retweet 11 likes -
Neither did I specifically say that. You're misrepresenting. You denied manipulation of rounding on Wall Street, I just gave you an example of it. Whether or not the SEC bans it is irrelevant. Accept that you were wrong instead of arguing for alternative meaning (like 2+2=5).
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Yeah I said I didn't know about that It's a fun little story, it seems unlikely to come to anything unfortunately because it's so difficult to prove It's also a demonstration of my point, not a refutation of it
1 reply 1 retweet 6 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @Aya62335284 and
I mean the point of the article is that sometimes 2+2 should equal 5 (when the sum of the mantissa being rounded off both numbers is higher than 5) Sometimes it shouldn't Companies are exploiting the edge case between should and shouldn't
1 reply 1 retweet 8 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @Aya62335284 and
Your other article cheekily argues we could avoid this situation entirely if we made it a rule to always round down (truncate) It then goes on to point out that there are obvious real world cases where doing this is perverse
2 replies 1 retweet 5 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @Aya62335284 and
And that most importantly truncating when people EXPECT you to round could lead to disaster (especially on the stock market, which is entirely driven in the short term by wild emotional guesswork) Hence the important thing is deciding on a consistent standard
2 replies 2 retweets 6 likes
The whole reason this is an issue is that the application of math to real world situations is a subjective human decision (If I have exactly $4.52 in my pocket and I say "I have five dollars in my pocket" am I lying? Am I lying if I say four dollars? Are both of them lying?)
-
-
Replying to @arthur_affect @Aya62335284 and
Just for fun. If I assume we naively round numbers, I would round up but I can't say rounding down is wrong. On the other hand, a reasonable assumption is to round to some value you can spend. You can pay a 4$ bus ticket but, you can't pay a 5 $ fare.
0 replies 0 retweets 1 likeThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.