Yeah I’m personally a bit embarrassed by not catching it myself as well. I’m thankful that at least it changed very little about the thrust of the post.
Really appreciate the sanity check. You’re totally right, oops. Looks like when I multiplied I somehow missed the .8. I will edit the post.
[For people reading this after I’ve edited: I previously had 44% from my independent impression due to messing up the multiplication, then adjusted down to 40% for my all-things-considered view. Now I have 35% for both independent impression and all-things-considered view.]
Not sure the maths is right on those 6 probabilities?
0.8 * 0.85 * 0.75 * 0.9 * 0.8 * 0.95 = 35% chance.
Sorry if I’ve misunderstood what you were trying to do there.
I think it’s pretty embarrassing for us as a community that this post got to >200 karma and ~30 comments before such a simple math error was found.
(I’m a culprit here too; I upvoted this post upon skimming it when it first came out, without even doing the most basic of sanity checks)
Yeah I’m personally a bit embarrassed by not catching it myself as well. I’m thankful that at least it changed very little about the thrust of the post.
I don’t think you need be embarrassed—you responded politely & not defensively.
That’s definitely rarer on the internet than minor arithmetic errors!
Really appreciate the sanity check. You’re totally right, oops. Looks like when I multiplied I somehow missed the .8. I will edit the post.
[For people reading this after I’ve edited: I previously had 44% from my independent impression due to messing up the multiplication, then adjusted down to 40% for my all-things-considered view. Now I have 35% for both independent impression and all-things-considered view.]