Path: ...!news.roellig-ltd.de!open-news-network.org!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Wilf <wilf21@is.invalid>
Newsgroups: misc.phone.mobile.iphone
Subject: RE: green bubble syndrome
Date: Sat, 12 Oct 2024 14:46:48 +0100
Organization: Wilf21
Lines: 26
Message-ID: <veduk6$65bo$2@dont-email.me>
References: <xn0oruv2k1siabt002@reader443.eternal-september.org>
 <ve6sv0$2q45v$1@dont-email.me> <ve7s0q$31vac$1@dont-email.me>
 <lmqdldFflfjU1@mid.individual.net> <veasft$3k74p$1@dont-email.me>
 <vebt8i$3p8sg$1@dont-email.me> <vec4f6$a364$2@solani.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sat, 12 Oct 2024 15:46:47 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="7f4e6f949d2f7bb6994041a4073d1085";
	logging-data="202104"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+gofwIGVhOn32R0zggnq4t"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:YQNqcBfpv6VERiQHRa5NyiKu6NA=
Content-Language: en-GB
In-Reply-To: <vec4f6$a364$2@solani.org>
Bytes: 2264

On 11/10/2024 at 22:14, Jörg Lorenz wrote:
> On 11.10.24 21:11, Chris wrote:
>> Wilf <wilf21@is.invalid> 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.  So just because someone has no background in
>>> statistics is a not a reason to necessarily doubt the premise.
>>
>> Correct.
> 
> No. It is not correct by any means.
> I still lack the proof that the sample is relevant.
> 
> 

That's my point.  We have to be persuaded that the sample was properly 
chosen.  Beyond that, the relatively small sample size does not in 
itself invalidate the significance of the results.

-- 
Wilf