Not a big difference, and making the point in caps IS NOT PER SE PERSUASIVE: a point estimate is a value that estimates a population parameter. They can say "we estimate 5.0%" and statistically this tends to mean "the null hypothesis is that the population mean is 5.0% but we didn't count them all so our estimate happens to be 5.0%" and we are okay to presume their sample mean is BLUE such that we test the null hypo that the population mean is 5.0%. Put simply, they can say its an estimate but unless/until the provide a range, that is an assertion about the unobserved population mean.
This is fantastic, thank you for all your videos. Safe to say you helped me with my FRM course but I love watching your examples even after the course. Thank you a lot, you are literally a lifesaver!
The funny thing is that according to someone who read the acquisition contract, Twitter wouldn't be in violation of the agreement even if they misrepresented the amount of bots as long as they gave the raw data, which they did. So even if Elon Musk was able to prove that 90% of the accounts were bots and Twitter claimed it was less than 5%, Twitter would still not be in violation of their agreement and Elon could not back out claiming Twitter was in breach of contract. He would be the one backing out and therefore he would be the one paying penalties. ruclips.net/video/4ffKoZXt-BM/видео.html
Would you ever considering playing sound to my right ear as well?
The small sample size was chosen by Twitter
thank you, didn't know that
I suppose they're checking every day...
Of course, it's Musk who said their sample size was 100. And about half of what he says is untrue
No, Twitter stated they ESTIMATE only 5% are bots. BIG DIFFERENCE
Not a big difference, and making the point in caps IS NOT PER SE PERSUASIVE: a point estimate is a value that estimates a population parameter. They can say "we estimate 5.0%" and statistically this tends to mean "the null hypothesis is that the population mean is 5.0% but we didn't count them all so our estimate happens to be 5.0%" and we are okay to presume their sample mean is BLUE such that we test the null hypo that the population mean is 5.0%. Put simply, they can say its an estimate but unless/until the provide a range, that is an assertion about the unobserved population mean.
bro please provide stereo in future
excellent david
This is fantastic, thank you for all your videos. Safe to say you helped me with my FRM course but I love watching your examples even after the course. Thank you a lot, you are literally a lifesaver!
you are too kind, thank you!
The funny thing is that according to someone who read the acquisition contract, Twitter wouldn't be in violation of the agreement even if they misrepresented the amount of bots as long as they gave the raw data, which they did. So even if Elon Musk was able to prove that 90% of the accounts were bots and Twitter claimed it was less than 5%, Twitter would still not be in violation of their agreement and Elon could not back out claiming Twitter was in breach of contract. He would be the one backing out and therefore he would be the one paying penalties.
ruclips.net/video/4ffKoZXt-BM/видео.html
Awesome. My apologies if I missed it but where can I get the Excel file?
Nice video.
Nice!