I don’t mean to keep quoting pg’s sampling bias takes but I can’t help myself - clearly if you filter for under 60 & founder & rich then you will find that ‘age at founding’ is low - many older founders do not have time to get rich enough before they turn 60!https://twitter.com/paulg/status/1373663906170863624 …
-
I mean, to be fair, this isn't really a statistical misrepresentation since he states exactly what he's doing. Still a weird flex.
Yeah I’m not saying he’s not aware! Just a strange thing to highlight given that you set up the sample to give exactly this result 
-
-
well the 5 descendants of founders really drag the average down since they start at negative ages of when their ancestors first founded
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
All the cherry-picking aside, what is he even trying to say here?
-
That one should become a founder as early as you can? Have a theory -> go looking for data that fits that theory -> broadcast it as a truism to your legion of followers. A potent cocktail of sampling+confirmation bias...
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.