>>18726764Actual mathematician here. Let me explain why Dave is employing confirmation bias.
1. Netflix does not differentiate live viewers the way Dave is representing.
2. He is assuming the only possible way for the numbers to add up is if L watch live and N watch later, but he then makes up the numbers those letters represent to fit the narrative he wants to conclude.
3. There is no set parameter to account for actual viewership per person. Dave is making the assumption that every single person who watches Raw watches the entire show, every single minute.
4. Even though he constantly pats himself on the back for understanding TV ratings, going over them every single week, he completely ignores the fact that the reason quarter hours have different ratings is because not everybody watches the full shows.
5. He is also ignoring the fact that unlike television ratings, which at least attempt to estimate viewers per household, Netflix is 2.6 million accounts, not 2.6 million individual viewers. He is ignoring so many variables to get the conclusion he wants.
6. By only presenting a fraction of the data, interpreted in this manner, any peer review would immediately recognize these findings as statistically insignificant, which in layman's terms, means it is not proof of anything. His "conclusion" is not factual in that it cannot be validated.
