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 …
I think they should present not numbers but visual ranges that are blur accordingly for this kind of models.
-
-
If you scroll down herr they do have ranges for 80% confidence. http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/ …
-
They're not writing textbooks. This is media. The presentation is dominated by too precise numbers.
- Show replies
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.