Surprisingly popular • Hacker News Board

Re: Surprisingly popular

#11

Post by simias » Sun, Jul 28, 2019, 2:51 PM UTC

The way I understand it it's effectively it's a good way to identify trick questions and the people who correctly identify the "trick" (by saying that other people would fall for it and reply differently) are more likely to be right overall and it's reflected in the percentage difference.

Wouldn't you get the same result simply by saying "let's just consider the answers from people who said others would respond differently because they're more likely to be right"? That's more intuitive to me and I believe it's effectively the same operation.

Re: Surprisingly popular

#12

Post by awillen » Sun, Jul 28, 2019, 2:52 PM UTC

The wisdom of crowds is a truly fascinating thing... the fact that people don't really need to know what they're talking about as long as there's enough of them really blows my mind.

Re: Surprisingly popular

#13

Post by [deleted] » Sun, Jul 28, 2019, 2:53 PM UTC

mathgeek wrote: post #4

I’m not sure what to think of a Wikipedia article without any sections on Uses, and the only Example being unreferenced.

[deleted]

Re: Surprisingly popular

#14

Post by StavrosK » Sun, Jul 28, 2019, 2:54 PM UTC

Noumenon72 wrote: post #2

The capital is not Philadelphia, it's Harrisburg. So the idea must be that most people think they are right and others will agree with them, but there are people who get it right and know that others get it wrong, and they are responsible for the difference in scores.

Thanks, I read the article multiple times and couldn't really understand why someone would give the wrong answer and then assume that most people would give the right answer (I didn't know Pennsylvania wasn't the capital of Philadelphia).

Re: Surprisingly popular

#15

Post by maaaats » Sun, Jul 28, 2019, 3:02 PM UTC

Noumenon72 wrote: post #2

The capital is not Philadelphia, it's Harrisburg. So the idea must be that most people think they are right and others will agree with them, but there are people who get it right and know that others get it wrong, and they are responsible for the difference in scores.

The article should state clearer that the answer is no, as it made no sense to me before reading your comment. (Edit, it's fixed now)

Re: Surprisingly popular

#16

Post by theelous3 » Sun, Jul 28, 2019, 3:09 PM UTC

busfahrer wrote: post #8

I wonder if this could be viewed as an application of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect

Nope. That is overconfidence of the ignorant, and this is dealing with trusting the high confidence of the correct.

It doesn't really matter here that people answered incorrectly.

Re: Surprisingly popular

#17

Post by cygx » Sun, Jul 28, 2019, 3:13 PM UTC

Let's look at another toy example, using made-up numbers:

Q: Is the earth flat?

    Yes: 10%
    No:  90%

Q: What do you think most people will respond to that question?

    Yes:  3%
    No:  97%

Analysis:

    Yes: 10% -  3% =  7%
    No:  90% - 97% = -7%

Conclusion:

The earth is flat, I guess ;)

Re: Surprisingly popular

#18

Post by brownbat » Sun, Jul 28, 2019, 3:13 PM UTC

simias wrote: post #11

The way I understand it it's effectively it's a good way to identify trick questions and the people who correctly identify the "trick" (by saying that other people would fall for it and reply differently) are more likely to be right overall and it's reflected in the percentage difference. Wouldn't you get the same result simply by saying "let's just consider the answers from people who said others would respond diffe…

Yeah, it's a bit like "second order" wisdom of the crowds.

First order: "How many jelly beans are in this jar?"

Second order: "What percentage of people will get the wrong answer to this question about Pennsylvania's capital?"

There's also the interplay with the Keynesian beauty contest: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keynesian_beauty_contest

In some sense the stock market is an infinite regress of these "what will other people think about value..." questions.

Re: Surprisingly popular

#19

Post by eaenki » Sun, Jul 28, 2019, 3:14 PM UTC

awillen wrote: post #12

The wisdom of crowds is a truly fascinating thing... the fact that people don't really need to know what they're talking about as long as there's enough of them really blows my mind.

The insanity of crowds

Re: Surprisingly popular

#20

Post by DangitBobby » Sun, Jul 28, 2019, 3:14 PM UTC

tofof wrote: post #10

Noumenon72 wrote: post #2

The capital is not Philadelphia, it's Harrisburg. So the idea must be that most people think they are right and others will agree with them, but there are people who get it right and know that others get it wrong, and they are responsible for the difference in scores.

That is indeed exactly the underpinning of the technique, not that you can tell from the wiki article.

It's hinted at, but you have really latch on to this statement at the beginning.

>is a wisdom of the crowd technique that taps into the expert minority opinion within a crowd.