Tagged “statistics”

Sensible change - instead of showing 50% and 25% amounts to 75% and 25%.

I assume them getting in-band about half the time will make people claim they are "wrong" about rain predictionss less.

With random arrivals, pileups are terrible

If customers take on avg 10 minutes to serve and arrive randomly at a rate of 5.8 per hour, then with one bank teller working, expected wait is 5 hours. With two tellers, 3 minutes.

Some good bits around how using past information can backfire. Either overfitting if looking too far back, or spending too much effort on predictions.

Enough effort goes into an initial forecast that updating your views when new information becomes available can trigger the sunk-cost fallacy and cause you to be right or wrong for the wrong reason.

Some loose-ish estimates, but some staggering figures in there.

16% of the world bought 70% of the vaccines. What force on earth could stop them? None, so we needed the massive supply increases, which were effectively banned.

What fraction of all vaccines were wasted?

• by excessive dosing. No sign of the dosing regimes changing despite strong evidence. 50-75%?**
• by bad needle design. 10-30% more.

Also includes some good links and references. And honest disclaimer from the author:

Note: I'm not a engineer, I'm not an economist, I'm not a pharmacologist, I'm not an epidemiologist. There will be something wrong with the above, no doubt in misunderstanding the nature of vaccine engineering bottlenecks.

Highlights:

• People exhibit overconfidence in their ability to calculate exponential growth
• People exhibit overconfidence in their ability to use a spreadsheet
• The results suggest insufficient demand for help and tools

Stats on editors/content for reddit, Amazon, and Wikipedia