Alternatively:
The way he holds that laptop in the second panel horrifies me.
He holds the laptop like that on purpose, to make you cringe.
Looks like an AI generated image to me. Lots of strange artifacts an artist wouldn’t create. And there’s something uncanny about the stippling pattern I’ve seen before in AI images.
Site from the watermark:
I like the meme, but I don’t think it actually works. The implication here is that there’s a correlation between confusing correlation with causation and dying. But there isn’t such a correlation. You are statistically equally likely to die either way
THATS THE JOKEI see the confusion now. It’s evident in the thread below. Carry on.
No, it’s not. The joke is that there is a correlation, but that actually correlation doesn’t mean causation. But here we have a situation where there is neither correlation nor causation.
The problem is that the joke suggests that correlation is when A -> B (or at least it appears as such). Implication (in formal logic) is not the same as correlation.
Sorry to get mathematical…
P(A∣B)=P(A) iff
P(B∣A)=P(B) iff
P(A∩B)=P(A)P(B)
->𝐴 and 𝐵 are uncorrelated or independent.
There is no correlation with events with probability 1
isn’t that just Bayesian apologist propaganda?
*jumps in an unlabelled Frequentist van* “Floor it!”
Leave this here: https://www.tylervigen.com/spurious-correlations
Wow, I nearly ignored your link - glad I didn’t!
I think some of the expandable GenAI “made-up explanations” and “images” on that page are the icing on the cake.
