This. Faux precision in not scientific, it's scientism, just like that Trump "2%" odds he had. He meant "unlikely".https://twitter.com/benjaminwittes/status/757982368779075588 …
-
-
Replying to @zeynep
Modeling is fine, but it's not like random sampling (which we can't even do well anymore) where you have precise error. And this early? Meh.
2 replies 2 retweets 10 likes -
Replying to @zeynep
Wouldn't mind it with some explanation, presented as a range, no digit after the period FFS, with some info on how model performed in past.
6 replies 0 retweets 6 likes -
Replying to @zeynep
People forget: presidential races are rare events. We don't have that much past data. It's not like state elections. Can't be that precise.
3 replies 5 retweets 10 likes -
Replying to @zeynep
Nate has spilled tons of ink, devoted multiple book chapters agreeing with you. He hates when people run w/his "predictions."
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @bluechoochoo
.
@bluechoochoo I am sure! I just wish they'd present it well; not make faux precise "Trump 2% odds of nominee" predictions in August.1 reply 1 retweet 4 likes -
Replying to @zeynep
When they rolled out model, they wrote two separate great articles about how/what they mean. Who works more to help our innumeracy?
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @bluechoochoo
I'm afraid that the faux precision in the presentation creates another form of innumeracy, a scientism.
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @zeynep
I feel like our innumeracy comes from other places + we bring that to the table when we read their site. It's completely good faith
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
They're in the media business; not in writing textbooks. Info needs to be in the method of the presentation, not footnotes.
-
-
Replying to @zeynep
Completely agree. Just trying to think of who's better. I followed their dataviz talent even b4 they worked there. Just a big fan
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likesThanks. 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.