mpicklesster wrote: »FluffyBird wrote: »200k, half of population swings in one day? All points within 1k of either 200k or 400k? Someone either gathered the data, or processed it, or made this graph with their butt. Most likely, all three.
Also, with such drops it averaged around 350k, not 400k before the last drop
If I had to guess, I'd say that whatever graphing app they use has some smoothing artifacts. (I do stats for a living, so I've seen it before.) Sometimes, in lower quality apps, the smoothing function tries to fit the data points to the increments of your Y-axis. So, for example, a data point of 247k would be smoothed to 250k; a data point of 253k would also be smoothed to 250k; etc.
It's not an uncommon problem for apps designed to make graphs for web browsers. The goal for those apps is usually to make a graph that will fit within a small window like a phone, tablet, or laptop. Unfortunately, some of those same apps use cheap smoothing functions (like the one I described above) to make the graph fit on small devices. So this means figures like the one in my initial post are only good for looking at trends, not absolute levels.
FluffyBird wrote: »mpicklesster wrote: »FluffyBird wrote: »200k, half of population swings in one day? All points within 1k of either 200k or 400k? Someone either gathered the data, or processed it, or made this graph with their butt. Most likely, all three.
Also, with such drops it averaged around 350k, not 400k before the last drop
If I had to guess, I'd say that whatever graphing app they use has some smoothing artifacts. (I do stats for a living, so I've seen it before.) Sometimes, in lower quality apps, the smoothing function tries to fit the data points to the increments of your Y-axis. So, for example, a data point of 247k would be smoothed to 250k; a data point of 253k would also be smoothed to 250k; etc.
It's not an uncommon problem for apps designed to make graphs for web browsers. The goal for those apps is usually to make a graph that will fit within a small window like a phone, tablet, or laptop. Unfortunately, some of those same apps use cheap smoothing functions (like the one I described above) to make the graph fit on small devices. So this means figures like the one in my initial post are only good for looking at trends, not absolute levels.
If you go to the original graph on the website, you can hover over points and see the actual numbers (which are slowly going up, btw). I forgot most of math stat from the university, but to me this whole thing looks like one big smoothing artifact. Also, if they "snap" to 200-s, that last drop doesn't hold more meaning than any before that and there's no trend then.
mpicklesster wrote: »1.) The whole thing can't be a smoothing artifact.
FluffyBird wrote: »mpicklesster wrote: »1.) The whole thing can't be a smoothing artifact.
I was speaking figuratively. I meant that even if their data held any meaning, whatever they did during processing and visualisation, erased it, and the graph is useless
FluffyBird wrote: »mpicklesster wrote: »1.) The whole thing can't be a smoothing artifact.
I was speaking figuratively. I meant that even if their data held any meaning, whatever they did during processing and visualisation, erased it, and the graph is useless
MaraxusTheOrc wrote: »FluffyBird wrote: »mpicklesster wrote: »1.) The whole thing can't be a smoothing artifact.
I was speaking figuratively. I meant that even if their data held any meaning, whatever they did during processing and visualisation, erased it, and the graph is useless
As the old saying in stats goes:
Garbage in, garbage out.
mpicklesster wrote: »MaraxusTheOrc wrote: »FluffyBird wrote: »mpicklesster wrote: »1.) The whole thing can't be a smoothing artifact.
I was speaking figuratively. I meant that even if their data held any meaning, whatever they did during processing and visualisation, erased it, and the graph is useless
As the old saying in stats goes:
Garbage in, garbage out.
That's not a saying in stats. That's an adage in computer science. It also hinges on the notion that the inputs be entirely made up. If that's the argument you're making now, then you really are grasping at straws.
Sandman929 wrote: »That takes care of lowering the ceiling
MaraxusTheOrc wrote: »mpicklesster wrote: »MaraxusTheOrc wrote: »FluffyBird wrote: »mpicklesster wrote: »1.) The whole thing can't be a smoothing artifact.
I was speaking figuratively. I meant that even if their data held any meaning, whatever they did during processing and visualisation, erased it, and the graph is useless
As the old saying in stats goes:
Garbage in, garbage out.
That's not a saying in stats. That's an adage in computer science.c
I don’t know what kind of stats you practice, but *every* epidemiologist and PhD statistician I work with in clinical trials and real-world data uses that saying.
Update 35 very likely will impact player counts based on the qualitative information emerging around it, but it’s so weird an actual statistician would die so proudly on *this* hill with *that* data.
FluffyBird wrote: »Someone clearly has a problem of taking things literally...
If true, that's a poor defense of your credibility.MaraxusTheOrc wrote: »“C’s get degrees I suppose.
You say you got C's then try to say you also teach a class. Sus...MaraxusTheOrc wrote: »"you can come to my class if you want. I’ll let you audit it.
Typical trolling. 1) opens up with lazy trolling, 2) argues energetically, but not in good faith, then 3) ends by acting like they don't care.MaraxusTheOrc wrote: »I’m so done with this thread. GG you win the message bored!
Please explain to me how it's misinformation? You haven't up with a shred of proof that the data are made up; nor have you given a reasonable argument as to why they're uncorrelated with actual user data.MaraxusTheOrc wrote: »This is just a textbook example of how misinformation becomes mainstream.
^How to telegraph to someone that you know you're wrong without having the courage to say it and face it.FluffyBird wrote: »Whatever.
Flaming: It’s okay to disagree and debate on the official ESO forums, but we do ask that you keep all disagreements civil, constructive, and on-topic. If a discussion gets heated and turns into a debate, remember that you should stick to debating the post and/or thread topic. It is never appropriate to resort to personal comments or jabs about those participating in the thread discussion.
Trolling or Baiting: The act of trolling is defined as something that is created for the intent to provoke conflict, shock others, or to elicit a strong negative or emotional reaction. It’s okay and very normal to disagree with others, and even to debate, but provoking conflict, baiting, inciting, mocking, etc. is never acceptable in the official The Elder Scrolls Online community. If you do not have something constructive or meaningful to add to a discussion, we strongly recommend you refrain from posting in that thread, and find another discussion to participate in instead. It is also not constructive or helpful to publicly call out others and accuse them of trolling, or call them a troll—please refrain from doing so. If you genuinely believe someone is trolling, please report the post or thread to the ESO Team, and leave it at that.