Can someone explain to me why the hell he’s ever needed a monte-carlo analysis? The margin of error is gaussian, and it’s not like it’s running up against zero bounds when it’s 50/50, so why isn’t it just a linear equation?
It’s just a linear equation, right? He does a monte-carlo so he can brag about running 80,000 simulations, not for any good reason, right?
Nate Zamak
big “i do numbers” energy
After viewing thousands of possible futures, the only timelines where Kamala wins are ones where she hands Dick Cheney an Infinity Cabinet Post and lets him turn half the Democrats into dust.
The creator of the simulation
the simulation in question:
for (int i = 0; i < 80000; i++) { if (rand() % 2 == 0) { printf("Kamala wins\n"); } else { printf("Trump wins\n"); } }I’m guessing it literally is a few lines in R, plugging in the polling data after running it through a “model” (i.e. tinkering with the variables based on how polls have historically translated into votes)
huh, the sync for Lemmy code block renderer doesn’t show the \ even within the code block 👁️👁️
Seems lots of unnecessary mods tbh,
S=0
for i in 1:80000
S+=rand()
end
ceil(S)
Modding by 2 is just a bitwise operation tho
Gotta dump results in some accumulate tho, and if then logic might be eh (although with branch prediction it might be auto 2 threads actually
or similar utilization at least)
could you please input that into chatgpt so it will give me a summary of the code output? I’m a busy data driven guy so I don’t have time for the details. however, I do have time for this post
Hey! I understood that! That Python class must’ve taught me something after all.
This is much cleaner than mine that I did in python.
thanks. Nate Silver paid me $50k to write this
I ran 80,000 simulations of me taking a poop
In 40,000 of them, shit ran down my ballsack and then I had shit on my balls.
In 32 of them, I sneezed in the middle of a stream of diarrhea and covered the entire backside of the toilet.
“We flipped a coin 80,000 times and it landed on Heads 40,012 times”
god i hope there is a dead tie in delegates
won in 42,069how the fuck does a “simulation” like this even work? so insane
stochastic modeling is the key word for this type of modeling if you actually care. that kind of thing is used for all kinds of stuff - weather, climate, ecology, river flows, economics
Take polling data then randomly roll for some error within the margin of error for each state. Then adjust based on bias. Do this n times and get your prediction.
Is there a point to this? From the tweet it doesn’t give new information. It just reaffirms that three contest will be close which everyone knew.
Yes, it’s possible that despite close in polls, the margin of error would favour one candidate being more likely to win.
“Everyone knows” something until there’s evidence to the contrary.
The polls and outcome could still be wrong if something unexpected happens, like if all the people who don’t usually vote decide this is the most important election and vote for the first and only time in their life.
They didn’t get a certain answer so it was useless this time, but if it had turned out that somehow one candidate won a supermajority of simulations then you got useful information. Can’t know unless you ask.
There is utility in some cases; there’s correlations between polling and areas, and the electoral college makes it all complicated (by design)
But, like, here? No, no practical difference between any of the ‘models’ all showing some variation of ‘its a toss up’
we slammed two rocks together 300 times and a spark flew out in 153.
This is more like slamming rocks together 300 times and getting sparks 150 times
deleted by creator
For anyone curious, this means Harris won 50.015% of the time
Truly an earth-shattering margin
![[Not the Onion] Simulations](https://hexbear.net/pictrs/image/eb31da58-12e6-442a-802a-bb751b72cecf.png){kind=link}