Hacker News Reader

Comment by teravor | Hacker News Reader

it has been amusing watching you try to pretend that you knew what survivorship bias was. first you assumed it had something to do with death. then you invoked the plane anecdote.

now you link the wikipedia without realizing that over 90% of it has nothing to do with planes.

    > Before attempting to attribute fraud, one must first determine that it exists.

this is an assertion not an argument. I suppose there is no further point to this discussion.

View on HN

My brother in Christ, you are projecting so hard it hurts. The comment that I responded to simply said "Survivorship bias" in response to a question about only Republicans getting caught doing voter fraud. Your attempt to theorize fraud by imposing the a priori notion of survivorship bias makes no sense. Survivorship bias is an error only when some data points do not "survive", i.e. are excluded from counting. The presuppose the latter part without evidence.

> this is an assertion not an argument

What part of the statement "Before attempting to attribute fraud, one must first determine that it exists." do you disagree with? You are starting from the assumption that fraud exists, then creating a fantasy explanation about who is committing it, without any factual basis at all.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com