(a thread unpacking this brilliant idea)
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_E.…
Based on this data point, we now infer what sort of customer she must be and predict her needs are and how we can fulfill them.
But when you combine the fact that a customer clicked on the button with your assumptions about how people behave, you get the magical ability to predict the future (e.g. what she'll buy).
At this stage, you have to decide whether future data points will lie on the red curve or the black curve.
Which one will you pick?
The idea that theories can never be proved true, but only be shown to be wrong is core to how science is done.
(Surprisingly, that’s also how VCs work: while investing, they know for sure which companies are “duds” but they never know which ones are going to be “unicorns”).
Notice that he didn’t say some models are correct.
He used the term “useful”.
Scientific laws (like Newton’s law of gravitation) are models that help us predict solar eclipses hundreds of years ahead.
So even though both models are wrong, Newton’s law gives us more mileage because it’s proven to be useful in a variety of contexts *that matter*.
- Don’t shoot for being right because there’s no such thing as the “correct” assumptions. Shoot for having “useful” assumptions.
- Data alone is sterile. Whenever you think data is giving you insights, it’s actually the data+your assumptions that are informing you.
If you have feedback or comments, do reply.
This thread is a cross-post from my monthly letter on VWO list vwo.com/blog/probabili…