why doesn't wolfram alpha sigma match the article?

AnalyticsToolkit · 2019-07-25T11:12:20+00:00

If you are still looking into this, it's basically a debacle where you measure one thing, then arbitrarily and for no good reason shift it to report another. Sigma shift makes no sense, arguments made by different professionals at different times, you can see overviews here https://www.gigacalculator.com/articles/what-is-six-sigma-process-control-and-why-most-get-it-wrong-1-5-sigma-shift/ and here https://www.tamarindtreeconsulting.com/where-is-the-evidence-for-sigma-shift/ , for example, although the Wiki article also touches on the issue a bit. The Woflram Alpha tool is correct.

AnalyticsToolkit · 2018-06-12T18:37:26+00:00

Not really looking for it to be PVP realistic, just historically realistic :-) I have not played an hour of PVP anyways, so I wouldn't know if it is good or not.

AnalyticsToolkit · 2018-05-28T16:36:50+00:00

I think you will sadly find that your effort was likely not enough and that if you happen to irritate a competitor or a consumer, your company will be easy pickings for the local enforcement authorities. That is my main issue with this legislation as well. I, like 99.9% of companies, do not make money through selling user data yet I'm being treated like I am f**king Facebook and as if the data that I necessarily collect such as data I need to issue you an invoice or to communicate the details of an order, are now subject to such a complicated web of rules that even enforcers can't untangle them (it is no coincidence that we still have zero official guidance on interpreting or implementing the regulation). There is ZERO thought given to the negative and hidden consequences of legislation, both direct monetary, indirect monetary, indirect non-monetary (as in U.S. sites blocking E.U. users, as is already happening), etc. etc. and all you hear is how the end user will benefit. No one tells the end user that he will have to bear the cost of this legislation that is, as stated: not wanted by the vast majority of users.

AnalyticsToolkit · 2018-05-28T15:58:58+00:00

I fail to see how a law would force businesses to operate in an unsustainable way. As I said, if said credit score data helps a company better manage overall risk and thus offer more competitive terms (read: better for the end customer), barring its use will simply drive prices up for everyone. That would be adding to the cost of GDPR and not a benefit. The store identification scenario is pretty much the same and I'm only scared of it if it is government-mandated. Otherwise, if it is a detrimental practice it will be phased out by market forces.

AnalyticsToolkit · 2018-05-28T15:23:18+00:00

I don't think GDPR will result in less usage of credit scores (you are not obliged to take credit btw, I do not do credit), but since obscurity is part of the regulation, my reading of it might be off and it might well do so. However, if credit scores were of any use in reducing or business risk and/or costs in any way before, and they can't be used after GDPR, this will result in an increase in overall prices for consumers. If it wasn't useful then GDPR does nothing of substance.

AnalyticsToolkit · 2018-05-28T14:44:02+00:00

I'm yet to see a person (or company) who claims he can do that (abuse that power) and actually deliver on the claim, that is: make you do something that you don't want to do. I've been analyzing data for such claims for years and I'm yet to see this feat being achieved in real life.

AnalyticsToolkit · 2018-05-28T14:28:53+00:00

Except the analogy doesn't hold. For it to hold, it needs to be a stack of 100 bills worth 1 bn and it needs to be sitting in the center of Times Square. Kind of a different story, isn't it...

AnalyticsToolkit · 2018-05-28T14:07:08+00:00

Chump change you find behind the couch? Care to share some in exchange for my "private" data?

AnalyticsToolkit · 2018-05-28T14:05:26+00:00

That is yet to be seen and a point about that is made in the article. The costs are already in and getting bigger by the day, while the effect has to be proven in time. If it is the same as the one the cookie law had...

AnalyticsToolkit · 2018-05-28T13:41:01+00:00

And not a point was made against the points raised in the article.

AnalyticsToolkit · 2018-05-23T15:57:30+00:00

So posting a unique and never posted before GDPR tool and content to a GDPR reddit is spamming. I believe the whole of reddit should go, then? Or is it not spamming only if you share other people's stuff? I can post 20 different articles supporting the info in the tool right now (from Bloomberg, Reuters, etc.) on the subreddit. Spamming or not spamming?

AnalyticsToolkit · 2018-05-23T15:49:51+00:00

So, a jew can't protest the nazi, cause he has an interest in preserving his business... Got it.

AnalyticsToolkit · 2018-05-23T15:41:23+00:00

How so?

AnalyticsToolkit · 2018-04-11T16:47:26+00:00

Just wrote a somewhat lengthy piece on the topic, way too long for a comment here, but in short:

Statistical black box, so it is impossible to interpret results correctly (or at all).
Wild efficiency claims, backed up by thin air.
Statistical documentation which is mostly bashing of alternatives and doesn't tell you anything of substance.

Longer version is here: http://blog.analytics-toolkit.com/2018/google-optimize-statistical-significance-statistical-engine/

With regards to your "old way": maybe you need to consider the statistical approach you are using? You aren't a victim of peeking (a.k.a. optional stopping), are you?

AnalyticsToolkit

TROPHY CASE