Because you dont actually understand what random is.
I didnt bring up police line ups that’s someone else in this thread. Im just happy to point out how those are essentially random selection as well.
My original point was that the OP was ambiguous on the selection process used for the population. thusly assuming a random selection process from the overall popullation is just as valid as assuming 1 worm farmer + 9 randoms.
Now: randomness.
Given a random population of N entities, assume you want a sample of M where M < N and you decide to filter by Y to get X sample.
X is still random despite the filtering. all you’ve done is biased the N random population towards Y. but unless you remove the initial randomness (somehow… which is almost impossible btw). this is why so much of science is predicated on collecting large datasets because we have to make sure enough of the data has the attributes we want that it’ll show up for study once we apply our faulty filtering mechanisms. and its why we spend so much effort creating better and better filters. its also why algorithm that leverage randomness are so powerful, because they match the reality of the problems being solved.
Using the line up as an example:
witness says the individual they saw had a long wide nose and a blue shirt.
reality: The detective has very different definition of what a wide/long nose is than the witness.
applying those two faulty filters to population N is still going to result in a random population because the initial candidate selection before applying those two (faulty) filters is random.
You realize I’m not reading any of that since it has NOTHING to do with your original point? Yeah?
That you’ve been provided proof that lineups are purposely selected from criteria (like being a worm farmer). You’ve completely lost track of your original point, which turns out it’s simply you can fucking read apparantly, and are now bloviating about the validity of police lineups.
You fucked up, and are now doubling and tripling down on fallacies, and just making yourself look like a fool while doing so.
Get help. Seriously, this infatuation about arguing, while presented evidence is fucking unhealthy.
The criteria includes one person who is a worm farmer, anyone with more than a couple brain cells will be able to get this. Even after having this explained by multiple people, you’re still being obstinate.
Because you dont actually understand what random is.
I didnt bring up police line ups that’s someone else in this thread. Im just happy to point out how those are essentially random selection as well.
My original point was that the OP was ambiguous on the selection process used for the population. thusly assuming a random selection process from the overall popullation is just as valid as assuming 1 worm farmer + 9 randoms.
Now: randomness.
Given a random population of N entities, assume you want a sample of M where M < N and you decide to filter by Y to get X sample.
X is still random despite the filtering. all you’ve done is biased the N random population towards Y. but unless you remove the initial randomness (somehow… which is almost impossible btw). this is why so much of science is predicated on collecting large datasets because we have to make sure enough of the data has the attributes we want that it’ll show up for study once we apply our faulty filtering mechanisms. and its why we spend so much effort creating better and better filters. its also why algorithm that leverage randomness are so powerful, because they match the reality of the problems being solved.
Using the line up as an example:
applying those two faulty filters to population N is still going to result in a random population because the initial candidate selection before applying those two (faulty) filters is random.
You realize I’m not reading any of that since it has NOTHING to do with your original point? Yeah?
That you’ve been provided proof that lineups are purposely selected from criteria (like being a worm farmer). You’ve completely lost track of your original point, which turns out it’s simply you can fucking read apparantly, and are now bloviating about the validity of police lineups.
You fucked up, and are now doubling and tripling down on fallacies, and just making yourself look like a fool while doing so.
Get help. Seriously, this infatuation about arguing, while presented evidence is fucking unhealthy.
no, i havent. and in fact anyone asserting this is absolutely moronic and has no idea what they are talking about for reasons I’ve already mentioned.
im not doubling down you dunces just dont know what you’re talking about. again as I’ve stated repeatedly.
lets start over so you can understand:
you have:
you are asked:
facts:
chucklefucks:
Not done bloviating eh?
The criteria includes one person who is a worm farmer, anyone with more than a couple brain cells will be able to get this. Even after having this explained by multiple people, you’re still being obstinate.
This is turning from funny to sad quick.
not done being a twat eh?
So how many people need to explain the same thing to you before you realize that you’re wrong? There’s already 4.
There’s no one here supporting you, I wonder why that is?
because you’re all idiots an incapable of basic reasoning clearly. =)
please feel free to re-read the entire thread as many times as you need to figure it out.
;)
Well done
I’ve read it multiple times, the only one who needs a clue is you. Take the hint dude, seriously.