1) Coming off as a jerk, and from a new account is a bad look
2) "Literally the opposite of a coin flip" would probably be either 0% or 100%
3) Your reasoning doesn't stand up without further info; it entirely depends on the sample size. I could have 5 coin flips all come up heads, but over thousands or millions it averages to 50%. 56% on a small sample size is absolutely within margin of error/noise. 56% on a MASSIVE sample size is _statistically_ significant, but isn't even still that much to brag about for something that I feel like they probably intended to be a big step forward.
1. The message was net-upvoted. Whether there are downvotes in there I can't tell, but the final karma is positive. A similarly spirited message of mine in the same thread was quite well receive as well.
2. I can't see how my message would come across as a jerk? I wrote 2 simple sentences, not using any offensive language, stating a mere fact of statistics. Is that being jerk? And a long-winded berating of a new member of the community isn't?
3. A coin flip is 50%. Anything else is not, once you have a certain sample size. So, this was not. That was my statement. I don't know why you are building a strawman of 5 coin flips. 56% vs 44% is a margin of 12%, as I stated, and with a huge sample size, which they had, that's massive in a space where the returns are deep in "diminishing" territory.
I wasn't expecting for my comment to be red so literally but ok.
We're talking about the most cost-efficient model, the competition here is on price, not on a 12% incremental performance (which would make sense for the high end model).
To my knowledge deepseek is the cheaper service which is what matters on the low-end (unless the increase in performance was in such magnitude that the extra-charge would be worth the money).
