A superset of this: you can worry a lot less about how you are perceived when dealing with anyone who has a very large N, because you'd have to be at the at like p = 0.995 of their distribution to be odd enough to trigger Serious Negative Consequences, or they'd do nothing else.https://twitter.com/paulg/status/1228233906874306561 …
-
-
(In that example you might or might not be authorized to talk about it, either formally or by their understanding of their own policies, but "Called about an account one didn't have fully authority to talk about" is at least a 10% occurrence for them.)
Show this thread -
The subtlety here: The Bayesian likelihood of you being a criminal contingent on you saying something which suggests criminality *after they suspect you of being a criminal* may very, very well be high enough to cause consequences.
Show this thread -
(This is yet another reason to not answer, even in jest, "Yes, this is a bomb" if you are ever asked whether something is a bomb, even though a commanding majority of people saying "Yes" to that question probably aren't accurately identifying a bomb.)
Show this thread
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.