Path: ...!news.roellig-ltd.de!news.mb-net.net!open-news-network.org!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: misc.phone.mobile.iphone
Subject: Re: green bubble syndrome
Date: Sat, 12 Oct 2024 17:21:01 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 125
Message-ID: <veeb5t$8hu6$1@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>
 <vebtqs$3pbcr$1@dont-email.me>
 <lmtvjjF2u71U3@mid.individual.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sat, 12 Oct 2024 19:21:01 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="31b990ca9d42455f4ca0c58f89512cc1";
	logging-data="280518"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/gFNox86NWocTjBQFJP6uY9rtuKJ0aDyY="
User-Agent: NewsTap/5.5 (iPhone/iPod Touch)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:x/yy5lPhlDOIeamROOm6NXHrCts=
	sha1:C+a2QgLzHFA5xHDieKCPCF7d1UY=
Bytes: 6249

Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
> On 2024-10-11, Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
>>> On 2024-10-10, Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote:
>>>>> On 2024-10-09 14:30:27 +0000, badgolferman said:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> If you're an Android user, and you've been sensing some deep
>>>>>> tensions between yourself and iPhone users, you may not be
>>>>>> imagining it.  According to a new survey conducted by All About
>>>>>> Cookies, some iPhone users "think less" of others represented as a
>>>>>> green bubble while texting, which often depicts Android users.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Conversely, a notable number of Android users have considered
>>>>>> switching to iPhone. Not necessarily because they believe that
>>>>>> it's a better device, but because they've felt pressured or
>>>>>> ridiculed into making the change.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> For this study, All About Cookies surveyed 1,000 anonymous adults
>>>>>> in July 2024 via Pollfish, a market research survey tool.
>>>>> <snip>
>>>>> 
>>>>> Wow! A whole 1000 ... what's that, 0.000000000000001% of users?
>>>>> What a cmoplete waste of time and money. There's absolutely nothing
>>>>> actually meaningful nor useful in that survey "result".  :-\
>>>> 
>>>> You've no idea how surveying works. If done correctly 1-2 thousand
>>>> ppl is a good sized survey. 
>>> 
>>> 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? 
>> 
>> You're doing a numerical comparison not a statistical one.
> 
> A meaningless distinction since we know nothing at all about the
> methodology used in this survey.

It's not meaningless. You're comparing apples and oranges. 

Simply one number is bigger than another doesn't intrinsically mean it is
note important. 

>> Population samples which are tiny fractions of the whole can be very
>> reliable. There is a whole scientific field of statistical sampling. 
> 
> Again, there's no evidence any scientific method was used here. If there
> was, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

That's not the reason we're having this discussion...

>>> The article also tells nothing about how these people were selected
>>> or approached for questioning - but you're certain the outcome is
>>> relevant?
>> 
>> I explicitly said I wasn't certain. Note the "if". 
> 
> Neither am I, which is in fact the entire point. 

Yet you're the one getting annoyed by the result. 

>> You, however, are certain they are not relevant based on literally no
>> evidence other than dumb maths. 
> 
> No, in fact my doubts are based on the lack of evidence. And that's how
> science actually works.

There is evidence. The results in the survey in fact. The fact you choose
to disregard them is your opinion. 

>>> Do you work for a circus, by chance?
>>> 
>>> I know many people who use iPhones. I don't know any of them who
>>> think less of anyone simply due to what kind of phone they happen to
>>> use.
>> 
>> Lol. You are literally arguing that your tiny n of a highly biased set
>> is more significant than when n = 1000 in a formal survey. jfc. 
> 
> I know, work with and support more than 1000 iPhone users, yet you
> assume otherwise. 

Sure you do. And you know all their opinions on coloured bubbles do you?

> Your bias is on display here. 

I have none. I literally do not care what the survey says. My bone is you
and yourname are desperately trying to dispute the survey simply because
you disagree with the results. 

> You are more willing to
> believe a survey of anonymous participants where the methodology is not
> in evidence published by this website, yet unwilling to believe a
> similar survey done by someone else, why? Because it isn't published on
> a website? You do realize anyone can publish anything on a website,
> right?

I don't believe the survey more. I'm simply highlighting the weakness in
your position. You could be right, but you've shown nothing but bias and
anecdote. Try harder. 

>>> And while I realize this is anecdotal, I find it hard to believe
>> 
>> Well done for revealing your internal bias. 
> 
> On the contrary, unlike the website publishing this survey, I've told
> you my results are anecdotal.

And yet still using them as a basis to refute the other results which means
you think yours are more important. Simply based on bias. 

>>> a significant number of iPhone users even care about such a trivial
>>> thing.  This whole thing smacks of anti-intellectual tribalism (aka
>>> zealotry) being pushed by trolls.
>> 
>> The only evidence of "anti-intellectual tribalism" is coming from you. 
> 
> Says the guy who blindly believes a survey without knowing anything
> about the methodologies used... 🤡

I don't care what the survey says.