Editing 1252: Increased Risk
Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
The edit can be undone.
Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
| Latest revision | Your text | ||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
| title = Increased Risk | | title = Increased Risk | ||
| image = increased_risk.png | | image = increased_risk.png | ||
| − | | titletext = You may point out that strictly speaking, you can use that statement to prove that all risks are | + | | titletext = You may point out that strictly speaking, you can use that statement to prove that all risks are tiny--to which I reply HOLY SHIT WATCH OUT FOR THAT DOG! |
}} | }} | ||
==Explanation== | ==Explanation== | ||
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
If the probability of a shark attack at the North beach is 5 per million, then the probability of shark attack at the South beach is still not more than 6 per million. The difference between these values is not enough to normally justify choosing one beach over the other, even though a "20% greater" chance sounds significant when stated out of this larger context. | If the probability of a shark attack at the North beach is 5 per million, then the probability of shark attack at the South beach is still not more than 6 per million. The difference between these values is not enough to normally justify choosing one beach over the other, even though a "20% greater" chance sounds significant when stated out of this larger context. | ||
| − | [[Cueball]] parodies the concern by noting that by going to a beach three times instead of two, their chances of attack by dogs with handguns in their mouths (a ludicrous and unrealistic scenario as dogs cannot buy guns{{Citation needed}} and are not likely to pick one up off the ground) increases by 50%. If the chance of the dog attack is one per billion on each visit to the beach, then the chance of attack increases over multiple visits; | + | [[Cueball]] parodies the concern by noting that by going to a beach three times instead of two, their chances of attack by dogs with handguns in their mouths (a ludicrous and unrealistic scenario as dogs cannot buy guns{{Citation needed}} and are not likely to pick one up off the ground) increases by 50%. If the chance of the dog attack is one per billion on each visit to the beach, then the chance of attack increases over multiple visits regardless; it's still one in a billion for any specific visit. This does not change the overall improbability of there ever being a dog swimming with a gun in its mouth. |
| − | [[Beret Guy]] misunderstands Cueball's probability, exhibiting the {{w| | + | [[Beret Guy]] misunderstands Cueball's probability, exhibiting the {{w|Gambler's fallacy}} by believing that since they haven't been attacked in their first two trips, the chance of attack by dogs with handguns is higher on their third outing. While this is true, Randall points out that it is a very small increase |
This is a common misunderstanding of statistics. While the overall probability of an attack in three trips would be higher than in a single trip, it doesn't change the fact that in each individual trip, the probability is still the same; whether or not they managed to avoid being attacked in their first two trips, the results of these trips do not factor into the probability equation of the third trip. | This is a common misunderstanding of statistics. While the overall probability of an attack in three trips would be higher than in a single trip, it doesn't change the fact that in each individual trip, the probability is still the same; whether or not they managed to avoid being attacked in their first two trips, the results of these trips do not factor into the probability equation of the third trip. | ||
| − | This also can be illustrated by coin flips: if one flips a | + | This also can be illustrated by coin flips: if one flips a coin ten times in a row, no matter what the result of each previous flip is (even if it were nine heads in a row), the odds of getting heads on the tenth coin flip remains 50%. In other words, past experience does not impact subsequent flips. |
The caption clarifies Cueball's point, but without sarcasm. | The caption clarifies Cueball's point, but without sarcasm. | ||
| Line 32: | Line 32: | ||
:[Caption below the panel:] | :[Caption below the panel:] | ||
| − | :Reminder: A 50% increase in a tiny risk is | + | :Reminder: A 50% increase in a tiny risk is ''still tiny''. |
{{comic discussion}} | {{comic discussion}} | ||
