• Frank [he/him, he/him]
    ·
    1 year ago

    Yeah Nate we know you're a colossal dumbass but thanks for reminding us.

  • EmmaGoldman [she/her, comrade/them]M
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Benefit of the doubt for a kingshit tier dumbass: I'm pretty sure he's actually talking about going on the big boat that sunk in 1912, not the stupid submersible that sank in 2023. I'm basing this on him specifying cruise, rather than dive.

    I think that's probably fair: most people think of very big cruise ships as being very safe, especially when they're designed to be the safest one ever built. Pretending you would have had the foresight to know that this one specific big boat that looks the same as all the other big boats would sink based on having a century of hindsight on exactly what went wrong that one time is kind of silly.

    If Covid didn't exist and you were offered an all expenses paid, all-inclusive free cruise on a shiny new cruise ship with the most respected cruise line with the best safety record, you'd probably take it too, even if you weren't a cruise person. That's a pretty sick deal to get a free luxury vacation with free everything.

      • EmmaGoldman [she/her, comrade/them]M
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I think it presumes that you're just a regular person in the neighbourhood living in 1912 with no knowledge of anything to come.

        Basically the same scenario as if your boss walked up to you today and offered you a free 1 week cruise trip today on the maiden voyage of a fancy new cruise ship that was just completed this year with all the fanciest safety systems.

        No hindsight to tell you, "oh but we know there's a 100% chance of failure because it did happen in history. All those people who got on the Titanic in April 1912 were buffoons because it ended up sinking! I am so smart and logical that I would have psychically known that the Titanic would sink because I'm cool and I just woulda known it."

        If it was time travel, you know I'm gonna print out a ton of helpful resources and designs, a shitload of Atorvastatin, hop off in Edinburgh and go visit some of my very good friends out east. "Hey, y'all got any bread or cantaloupes, you're never gonna believe this..."

  • came_apart_at_Kmart [he/him, comrade/them]
    ·
    1 year ago

    he ran some game theory and fed it into the model and it calculated there was a 93% of sitting in a dark, windowless tube smelling billionaire farts for 12 hours without being obliterated in a violent implosion. aka the "I'm with HER scenario."

  • radiofreeval [she/her]
    ·
    1 year ago

    How does a statistician make this dumb a take? He knows how high the chance of death is. Maybe he's just suicidal.

    • InevitableSwing [none/use name]
      hexagon
      ·
      1 year ago

      For a long time I thought nearly all of this sort of stuff was him trolling.

      I think I was partially right. For example when it comes to politics - it's hard (if not impossible) to know when he's being smarmy and when he's being a total dipshit. But this tweet is different. As you pointed out - it doesn't exactly build his brain as a statistican and really, really smart guy. This comment is bluecheck-level of idoicy. He does actually seem to be YOLO levels of stupid in many areas.

      I meant to write "build his brand" but I left in the typo. It's funny.

    • anotherone [none/use name]
      ·
      1 year ago

      His degree is in economics anyway, which is kiiinda close enough to statistics? But I'm sure everyone will understand what I'm getting at here.

      I knew him as a poker player (who called himself Nate "tha" Great) way before he was a household name so him being a smarmy douchebag was really no great shock.

        • anotherone [none/use name]
          ·
          1 year ago

          It's funny because I thought about this an hour ago and the way I would put it is "mainstream economics manipulates statistics to fit a preconceived worldview and theory." Which a lot of "statistics" related study is guilty of these days. But yeah, I think that's my problem with calling Nate Silver a statistician. He's a statistician who works backwards from a narrative.

    • InevitableSwing [none/use name]
      hexagon
      ·
      1 year ago

      He punked us. He was talking about the Titanic itself. "Titanic cruise" was misdirection so people might think he was talking about the sub and he could say "Of course I mean the ship itself." I should have known.

      • radiofreeval [she/her]
        ·
        1 year ago

        The Titanic sunk on it's maden voyage, making it much worse than the Titan, which survived a few dives. Both were too risky to warrant a trip though.

    • Albanian_Lil_Pump [he/him]
      ·
      1 year ago

      moat Americans are excited by treats and shiny toys. They like projecting that other everyone else

    • FourteenEyes [he/him]
      ·
      1 year ago

      He was never a good statistician and the Obama prediction was entirely a fluke and he rode that for ten years and never predicted anything else very well

  • FourteenEyes [he/him]
    ·
    1 year ago

    You could not fucking PAY ME to get into that thing even if everything went well. I'd be vomiting from the anxiety inside of a couple of hours.

  • somename [she/her]
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’m pretty sure he’s talking about taking a ride on the boat lol. Not the sub.