this post was submitted on 01 Dec 2024
1235 points (98.8% liked)

Science Memes

11631 readers
2303 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] renzev 158 points 1 month ago (3 children)

Can't believe nobody has linked the relevant xkcd yet

[–] [email protected] 20 points 1 month ago (1 children)

We appreciate your service.

[–] renzev 9 points 1 month ago
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 99 points 1 month ago (5 children)

Having two possible outcomes does not mean it's a 50:50 chance.

"So if I aim the arrow at the 1cm square from 100m away and shoot, I either hit it or I don't. So basically I have a 50% chance of hitting it."

[–] kryptonianCodeMonkey 93 points 1 month ago (3 children)

My wife, father-in-law and I were playing a board game with my brother-in-law. In this game, we were playing as detectives who have to try to find his character, but each turn he could move in secret in one of several directions. We were a few turns in at one point and he could have been in any of dozens of places at this point. We drove him nuts by saying "he's either in this spot or he's not, it's a 50-50 chance." He kept arguing "I could be in a ton of places! It's not a 50-50 chance!" But we just kept pretending we didn't understand and arguing that there were only two possibilities, he's there or he's not, so it was clearly a 50-50 chance. He got quite angry.

[–] Hawke 26 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Scotland Yard or Letters from Whitechapel?

[–] ch00f 17 points 1 month ago (2 children)

I love Scotland Yard. We got it for a friend who loves detective stories. Then discovered that it’s a public transit simulator which is even better.

[–] Hawke 9 points 1 month ago (4 children)

Honestly, Letters From Whitechapel is a better design of the same concept.

For detective story games, Sherlock Holmes Consulting Detective is amazing.

And for public transit games, Bus is the way to go (probably)

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Letters from Whitechapel?

Either that or you buried the lede by failing to mention something rather significant about the hidden character, and you were playing Fury of Dracula. Or my boardgamegeek-fu isn't as strong as I hoped.

[–] kryptonianCodeMonkey 9 points 1 month ago

Yeah it was Letters from Whitechapel.

[–] FuglyDuck 9 points 1 month ago

you know, if you watched for tells, that could tilt the probabilities... and I bet with the frustration... he was flashing tells all over the place...

[–] [email protected] 25 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Either I become president, or I don't.

Therefore, the odds of me becoming president is 50%

Brb committing 34 felonies.

[–] [email protected] 23 points 1 month ago

You've already failed.

You have to commit hundreds of felonies. In broad daylight. And brag about it.

Threaten witnesses. Delay everything.

And only be convicted of 34.

Then not get sentenced.

[–] Smokeydope 11 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

Very weird fun fact about arrows/darts and statistics, theres 0% chance of hitting an exact bullseye. You can hit it its possible to throw a perfect bullseye. It just has a probability of zero when mathematically analyzed due to being an infinitesimally small point. Sound like I'm making shit up? Here's the sauce

How can an outcome both be entirely possible and have 0% probability?

Q.E.D

[–] [email protected] 30 points 1 month ago (3 children)

Key word here is "infinitesimally." Of course if you're calculating the odds of hitting something infinitesimally small you're going to get 0. That's just the nature of infinities. It is impossible to hit an infinitesimally small point, but that's not what a human considers to be a "perfect bullseye." There's no paradox here.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Another lesson I the importance of significant digits, a concept I've had to remind many a young (and sometimes an old) engineer about. An interesting idea along similar lines is that 2 + 2 can equal 5 for significantly large values of 2.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 month ago

The thing with that is that it's actually a useful generalization to make in a lot of scenarios.

If you know nothing about the distinction between two possible outcomes, treating them as equally likely is a helpful tool to continue with the back of the envelope guess. Knowing this path needs 5 coin tosses to go right and this one needs 10 is helpful to approximate which is better.

Your example is obviously outside the realm where you have zero information, so uniform distribution is no longer the reasonable default. But the idea is from a reasonable technique, taken to extremes by someone who doesn't fully get it.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 54 points 1 month ago (2 children)

That's not even a stat question, it is a english question. It is an increase by 80% not to 80%
Statistics only come to play to figure out our new chances.

[–] [email protected] 37 points 1 month ago (4 children)

Maybe I'm wrong but by writing "increase by 80%" there is ambiguity you don't get if you instead spelled out:

  1. Increase by 80 percent
  2. Increase by 80 percentage points
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Or "by 80 percentage points"

[–] LovableSidekick 12 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

"By 80 percentage points" means add 80 more points to a number of percentage points, so 5% becomes 85%. "By 80 percent" means add 80 percent of the current value.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Fandangalo 44 points 1 month ago (3 children)

In game design, it has to be stated whether it’s multiplicative or additive. Sometimes a logarithmic function is used as well, with increases in efficiency as 1 / ( 1 + bonus ). This allows you to always add more bonus, but there’s diminishing returns.

[–] affiliate 16 points 1 month ago (2 children)

i wish it was more common to also indicate the precedence of a percentage increase, so that it’s easier to know if i’m dealing with (x + y ) * z or x + (y * z). although that’s admittedly a lot harder to communicate.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 32 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

I play video games; I need to know if the percentage is additive or multiplicative.

"+100%" looks pretty good until you see what "×25%" actually gives you.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 month ago (1 children)

×25% gives you 1/4 the original value, whereas +100% is double the original value, let's say 8/4 to keep it consistent. ×125% (in case a 1 is missing) is still only 5/4 the original value.

Is there a typo in your comment?

[–] Maggoty 18 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (6 children)

In video games they commonly use that to mean they are multiplying by 25. We know it's not correct in stats. This is why game wikis commonly put the actual formula for things rather than the tooltip the developers wrote.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Biggest lie in a game's tooltip/description of an item was how the formula for Armor Piercing rounds in Fallout 1 and 2 was bad, so instead of being stronger than regular rounds, they were weaker.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] [email protected] 31 points 1 month ago (2 children)

When my son was about to be born my mother in law caught wind that we didn't plan on circumcising (before researching it I mostly felt it was just strange to do cosmetic surgery on a newborn) but her argument was mostly parroting the 50% reduction in this that and the other disease, missing the fact that it was going from a 0.5% chance to a 0.25% chance, but of course introduced new risks by nature of being a surgery.

Naturally after looking more into it I learned just how bonkers circumcision is so I was far more cemented in my position

[–] [email protected] 24 points 1 month ago (1 children)

The fact that it is even allowed in so-called civilized countries is outrageous. In the US it common because some religious nut was obsessed with children's masturbation.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Buddahriffic 29 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Funny thing is this is a language issue, not a math issue.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Why not both?

I've always thought of math as a language and I talk to my kids about it that way too. Math is an other way to describe the world.

It's very different from spoken languages and translating between the two needs to be learned and practiced.

Our math education doesn't include enough word problems and it should be bi-directional. In addition to teaching students how to write equations based of sentences we should teach them how to describe what's going on in an equation.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] LovableSidekick 27 points 1 month ago (1 children)

It's really pretty simple - if something increases by 80%, you add 80% of whatever it already is... one dollar becomes $1.80... one percent becomes 1.8 percent.

Most people don't understand it because they've seen it done wrong so often, the wrong way seems right.

[–] blackbirdbiryani 28 points 1 month ago (7 children)

I'm quite willing to bet that 70% of the population has no clue that percentages, fractions, and decimals are the same thing.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] [email protected] 21 points 1 month ago (4 children)

I work in a place full of statisticians, and we've had to unfortunately have numerous conversations with some of them about the difference between "a decrease" and "a decrease in the rate." Apparently "it's increasing slower" isn't clear enough for some.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 19 points 1 month ago (3 children)

I've always wondered how to disambiguate multiplication and addition of percentages. I guess that's what percentage points are for?

[–] [email protected] 30 points 1 month ago

10% of your people vote for a party.

The votes increase by 10% => now 11%

The votes increase by 200% => now 30%

The votes increased by 50 percent points => now 60%

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 month ago (4 children)

The annoying part is that there is no well-known notation for showing percentage points, so people use % for both percentages and percentage points.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 17 points 1 month ago

Difference between increase of x% (old percentage + old percentage * x%)% and increase of x percentage points (old percentage and x)%

[–] prime_number_314159 16 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Wrong: I had a 1% chance, and I doubled my chances. Now my chances are 101%.

Right: I had a 1% chance, and I doubled my chances. Now my chances are 2%.

Wrighongt: I had a 1% chance, and I doubled my chances. Now my chances are 3%, because I'm a lucky person.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Maggoty 16 points 1 month ago

So you're telling me there's a chance?

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 month ago (2 children)

well it's ambiguous. Its also a sloppy way of expressing an increase by 80 percentage points.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 month ago (6 children)

People got this wrong about inflation as well. In 2020 there was actual deflation, and in 2021 there was very minimal inflation, meaning prices were still largely lower or similar as 2019. Then we saw 9% inflation in 2022. Total inflation in 2024 vs the 2019 benchmark was around 15%. Or 3% average per year, which is barely over the baseline. People just hear 9% inflation, completely missing the fact that this was a YoY number relative to the Trump recession.

[–] yesman 10 points 1 month ago (1 children)

And then there was that bogus article that said Argentina had lowered it's inflation to 2% and you find out in the article that's monthly inflation and the yearly figure was like 190%.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 month ago

That's why when presenting numbers at work, we always distinguish a movement of X % (percent) from a movement of X ppts (percentage points)

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 month ago

Dark Souls cleared this up for me real quick.

[–] Mango 9 points 1 month ago

I know all this. I play DPS!

load more comments
view more: next ›