On 3/30/07, Andy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 29/03/07, Richard Lockwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Even 10% is significantly higher than 0.4%
I was using 10% as an upper limit. If the true value was over 5% I
would not be surprised. The next round number above 5% is 10% and over
that would surprise me.
The next "round number" above 0.4% is 0.5%.
On a sample of "visitors to BBC home page" - an inflation of over
1000% (as you are suggesting now - 0.4% to 5%) is, frankly, unlikely.
If you'd argued that Linux use was more likely to be 0.5% than 0.4% you'd:
a) Possibly have a point
b) Have been wasting everyone's time.
> No - this is not evidence. You're coming up with a series of
> hypotheses to fit your scenario - that a significant proportion of
> people use Linux as a desktop OS. This is the same arguing technique
> that proponants of Intelligent Design use. "You can't prove
> otherwise, so it must be true."
Maybe I should have phrased what a said differently? Will you allow me
to do so now?
There are possible inaccuracies associated with this metric for
judging Operating System usage. This may cause the number to be
inaccurate so can not be relied on as 'proof' as that would require an
element of certainty. It can been seen as to suggest certain things
however.
Certainly, and you are of course quite right. However, in your
previous posts, you state that as the BBC stats "suggest" that Linux
use is only 0.4%, they are obviously wrong due to a conspiracy, and
that Linux use is, in 'fact' (with no evidence), over 1000% higher
than that. "Possible inaccuracies" do not cover that kind of imagined
error margin. You're going to need to backpedal a lot more than that
to get out of this one.
Rich.
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
