Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Wilf Newsgroups: misc.phone.mobile.iphone Subject: RE: green bubble syndrome Date: Sat, 12 Oct 2024 14:47:55 +0100 Organization: Wilf21 Lines: 20 Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Date: Sat, 12 Oct 2024 15:47:53 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="7f4e6f949d2f7bb6994041a4073d1085"; logging-data="202104"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19dvYKd2ucCXp6fcIpkjazR" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cancel-Lock: sha1:SwlfMfXP9liBhoV7X8q+e/9pNns= In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-GB Bytes: 1948 On 11/10/2024 at 23:38, Alan Browne wrote: > On 2024-10-11 05:51, Wilf wrote: >> On 10/10/2024 at 17:28, Jolly Roger wrote: >>> Apple sold 2.5 BILLION iPhones (as of 2023, so not counting 2024), and >>> you are trying to tell us that a survey of 1000 people is significant? >>> Quick question: How many times do you think 1000 goes into 2.5 billion? >> >> If the sample is chosen properly (and that's the critical part), results >> from a small but representative sample of the whole population can be >> statistically significant. > > Do you have evidence that the sample pop was chosen properly? > No and I'm not trying to support it. All I'm saying is that the small size of the sample does not in itself invalidate the result. Sure, the sample has to be properly chosen. -- Wilf