News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Triple-dip La Niña confirmed as BoM makes declaration by refurb on Sunday September 18, 2022 @02:46AM (#32885070)
I mean, a 4 or 5 year La Nina would also be a very big surprise.
Re:Triple-dip La Niña confirmed as BoM makes declaration by shawabawa3 on Sunday September 18, 2022 @10:50AM (#32888009)
4 year la Nina is a big surprise, but a 4 year la Nina given we've had 3 years already is a much smaller surprise
Re:Triple-dip La Niña confirmed as BoM makes declaration by refurb on Sunday September 18, 2022 @08:51PM (#32893018)
That’s not how probabilities work.

If I flip a coin and get heads 3 times in a row it doesn’t change the odds on the 4th flip.

Re:Triple-dip La Niña confirmed as BoM makes declaration by Arnt on Monday September 19, 2022 @01:38AM (#32894648)
It is how probabilities work. A plain example: The odds of flipping ten heads in a row are 1/1024, but if you've already flipped nine heads, the odds of flipping ten heads are 1/2.
Re:Triple-dip La Niña confirmed as BoM makes declaration by refurb on Monday September 19, 2022 @01:58AM (#32894754)
Can you please tell me in detail how you're not agreeing with what I said? I said the exact same thing.

"If I flip a coin and get heads 3 times in a row it doesn’t change the odds on the 4th flip."

Re:Triple-dip La Niña confirmed as BoM makes declaration by Arnt on Monday September 19, 2022 @03:11AM (#32895242)
It's not the odds of the fourth flip, it's the difference between four flips and a fourth flip.

Look upstream, you'll find someone (you perhaps? I don't care who) who doesn't realise whether the current La Niña situation is equivalent to a fourth-flip or a four-flips situation. A common problem in statistics, in my experience: People sort of understand two statistical statements, but then apply the wrong one to the real-world situation they're in.