Lawlight said:
Aielyn said:
Lawlight said:
2000 data points for worldwide numbers? Well, that would expect that big inaccuracies. |
If we assume a reasonably unbiased sampling for those 2000 data points, then you would expect a margin of error at 95% confidence of 2.2%, assuming an infinite population. Smaller for the real population. That is, 95% of the time you would expect the random sample's mean to be within 2.2% of the real mean.
Seriously, if you don't understand basic statistics, don't get involved in this discussion, you're in over your head.
|
I don't care how you try to justify it with statistics - 2000 data points will not give you anywhere near accurate enough data - but we've seen that already.
|
I must have been incorrect with the 2000 data points. I thought ioi said that figure earlier in the thread but he is saying he didnt. Still, I take SW sales with a grain of salt on this site and I started to when Sven said those things in 2009. I started seeing a lot of things when I looked that didn't make sense.
It's not that I don't care for the figures and think no one should. Thats not it. I just cant stand the people who take them as gosspel and try to use it to prove points. When it becomes a focal point in an arguement it gets kinda annoying.
