SlavaOn
Jedi Master
This is something that just came into my head this morning...
I called it "the rounding error".
It applies, when a decision is being made, which is based on a multitude of factors. If 99% of all factors have been taken into consideration, it is assumed that 1% will not matter much and could be ignored.
When the decision to go this or that way needs to be taken, and the split is almost 50:50 people are relying on rounding rules as well.
The rounding rule determines who is in majority. Republicans with 50,001 beat democrats with 49,999 and win whatever they are competing for.
In this example, it is 0.001 that made the difference. But, in reality there may have been 0.0006 that was rounded to 0.001, and going even deeper, 0.00057 was rounded to 0.0006
I looked at that 50,001:49,499 split from graphical perspective. The solid majorities are represented by black and white halves of the circle.
My guess, it is a fine line separating blacks from whites is where the rounding is taking place. In modern US elections republicans and democrats spend most of their time and money campaigning in "swing vote" states. They are called "battleground states" for a reason. Other states are already determined to be solidly either black or white states. It is the states whose, voting outcome is undecided, that are deciding who wins the race. It is a thin line, in the end, that casts make or break votes...
I was not going to make a political argument, it was just an example where the the smallest factor, that oftentimes gets rounded and discarded, truly matters.
I brought that example to support the idea that we, as humans, are blinded by the masses of blacks and whites and turn off our critical thinking, forgetting, that the small factors are where the devil is.
We could be clever.
We could be successful.
We could be rich.
None of that would help if we make a rounding error.
How not to make a rounding error? Should we, in a final analysis, reply on intuition? Flip a coin? I do not know.
FWIW
I called it "the rounding error".
It applies, when a decision is being made, which is based on a multitude of factors. If 99% of all factors have been taken into consideration, it is assumed that 1% will not matter much and could be ignored.
When the decision to go this or that way needs to be taken, and the split is almost 50:50 people are relying on rounding rules as well.
The rounding rule determines who is in majority. Republicans with 50,001 beat democrats with 49,999 and win whatever they are competing for.
In this example, it is 0.001 that made the difference. But, in reality there may have been 0.0006 that was rounded to 0.001, and going even deeper, 0.00057 was rounded to 0.0006
I looked at that 50,001:49,499 split from graphical perspective. The solid majorities are represented by black and white halves of the circle.
My guess, it is a fine line separating blacks from whites is where the rounding is taking place. In modern US elections republicans and democrats spend most of their time and money campaigning in "swing vote" states. They are called "battleground states" for a reason. Other states are already determined to be solidly either black or white states. It is the states whose, voting outcome is undecided, that are deciding who wins the race. It is a thin line, in the end, that casts make or break votes...
I was not going to make a political argument, it was just an example where the the smallest factor, that oftentimes gets rounded and discarded, truly matters.
I brought that example to support the idea that we, as humans, are blinded by the masses of blacks and whites and turn off our critical thinking, forgetting, that the small factors are where the devil is.
We could be clever.
We could be successful.
We could be rich.
None of that would help if we make a rounding error.
How not to make a rounding error? Should we, in a final analysis, reply on intuition? Flip a coin? I do not know.
FWIW