alt Hacker Newsthat's right, but because these models are probabilistic, it's also possible to be confidently wrong (and all future models will be smarter still and still have that possibility)
that's right, but because these models are probabilistic, it's also possible to be confidently wrong (and all future models will be smarter still and still have that possibility)
Correct. Not to say we're getting into the weeds of probability here as well.
"What are the odds a thunder will strike in Paris at 1pm UTC of 2026-09-16" - that could be a 0.001 chance going from blind historical measurements; 0.01 if it's raining; or 1 or 1 after the date has passed.