Comment by gruez
1 year ago
Confirmation bias makes it hard to extract much from these types of anecdotes. On a daily basis you might be talking about dozens of products. If your lookback period is a few days, that could 100s of products, and you'll get spooky coincidences pop up from time to time from pure chance alone.
And, if not you, your friends and family. “I know a guy who had it happen to him” is almost as bad for confirmation bias as “it happened to me”.
Technilogical causes are much more likely than accidental causes for such effects to appear, in today's world.
Occam's Razor and the answer to the question, "What kinds of companies are at work in the environment?" push that probability in a specific way, because the motives and means are definitely there. Do you think they are the kinds of companies that would waste such an opportunity?
Their Chief Councel's recommendation depends on how slimy they are, right?
What would happen if they got caught? Slap on the wrist would be all, if that, no?
>Technilogical causes are much more likely than accidental causes for such effects to appear, in today's world.
This is absurd. The chances of rolling snake eyes twice in a row is 0.07%. However, that doesn't mean if I do get snake eyes back to back, I should think it's caused by "Technilogical causes" (aliens? CIA remotely controlling the dice?). At best, it's an incomplete argument. The power of the birthday paradox, along with the factors I explained in my previous comment means such occurrences are virtually guaranteed to occur if you're on the look out for them. This can't be dismissed with an off-hand with "Technilogical causes are much more likely than accidental causes for such effects to appear, in today's world".
>Occam's Razor and the answer to the question, "What kinds of companies are at work in the environment?" push that probability in a specific way, because the motives and means are definitely there. Do you think they are the kinds of companies that would waste such an opportunity?
Apple got sued for accidentally recording siri queries, and that cost them class action lawsuit, along with the requisite discovery. Some company intentionally doing this, all the while actively engaging in a conspiracy is far harder, and much easier to fall apart due.
[flagged]
5 replies →
> (aliens? CIA remotely controlling the dice?)
No, more like Siri, bruh. To sell some too-expensive slippers. You used the word "absurd", didn't ya?
> accidentally recording siri queries
Sure. Apple does things by accident. Gotcha.
Motive, means, opportunity. Which is missing?
2 replies →
Why can't you both be right? If you talk about 100 products in a week, chances are you're conducting searches about some of them or your demographic data suggests that you might be in market for it.
We don't talk about products. We live very, very simply. We watch very little fiction. We mostly listen to music and watch a handful of soccer highlights. No Microsoft, no ads on the `puters, no kids on phones or the net except for chess.
We did watch three Tom Papa stand-up shows on NYE, though. They were glorious; we were crying laughing. "Outrageous!" I love that guy, so brilliant, silly, and hilarious!