@WomanDefiner This is also how you get 20,000 ballots without a single vote for the candidate from the opposing party (something that shouldn't be statistically possible if real, individual human beings are filling out ballots themselves).
@CovfefeAnon@enggirlfriend Whenever people try to falsify data (i.e. commit election fraud) they almost always leave evidence that can be detected by statistical analysis.
It's like asking people to write down "random" numbers. Humans cannot generate true random numbers by hand.
@Nemtastic1@ArtemisConsort People stand in line in NYC because they think it conveys high status. i.e. "I'm waiting in this line for something you can't have because you're not waiting in this line"
@memeticsisyphus Which is of course the reason why their murder rate is so high. Anything remotely perceived as a "diss" becomes a challenge to their manhood requiring substantial escalation, or loss of status.
@philosopherjstr@xwanyex The manner is which someone answers the question: "How would you feel if you didn't have breakfast this morning?" is likely highly correlated to their ability to understand statistics.
@xwanyex TFW you realize that humans and AI "learn" in a similar way... the quality of the training sets make a big difference in the way they respond to questions.
@John_Cyrano@willsolfiac AI simply reflects the quality of its training data... if it was trained on a data set that said the moon was made of cheese, the AI would argue that the moon was made of cheese.