this post was submitted on 30 Jul 2024
199 points (97.6% liked)

News

23259 readers
3569 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Anti-government activists across Venezuela are toppling giant statues of Hugo Chávez to express their anger over the alleged stealing of an election by the late president’s handpicked successor, Nicolás Maduro.

Anti-government activists across Venezuela are toppling giant statues of Hugo Chávez to express their anger over the alleged stealing of an election by the late president’s handpicked successor, Nicolás Maduro.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] dustyData@lemmy.world 26 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (2 children)

Here's a fun nerd mathematical sidetrack that proves the fraud further for anyone who is reading. Let's talk percentages.

When we express a proportion of a number against a total we are making percentages. Element/Total * 100 = %. Usually, we get percentages with a lots of decimal places, proportions are rarely exact in real life, so we must round somehow if we want to report numbers with less decimals. This means that if we try to reverse the process, find out the numbers starting from the percentages, we get errors, as information was lost during rounding. This error is usually between the bounds of one percent point. It's extremely rare for this process to be perfectly reversible.

When looking at the numbers announced by the electoral authority, however, this strange phenomena happens, not once, not twice, but three times. Let me show you. The results as announced were (official source):

  • Maduro with 51.2% of the votes or, 5,150,092 votes
  • Edmundo Gonzalez with 44.2% of the votes or, 4,445,978 votes
  • Other candidates, aggregated 4.6% or, 462,704 votes shared by 8 different candidates.

You are free to do the math with me, step by step, get your calculator app out.

  1. The total of votes considered are 10,058,774 votes.
  2. Let's look at their proportions:
  • 5150092/10058774 = 0.5119999~
  • 4445978/10058774 = 0.4419999~
  • 462704/10058774 = 0.460000~

Hmmm

  1. Well, let's try to derive those numbers back. A percentage point is Total/100

10058774/100 = 100587.74

So we could expect an error of anywhere from 50,000 votes over or under when we try to derive the totals from the percentages.

  1. Let's see what happens if we try to derive the total amount of votes from the percentages. Element/% * 100 = Total
  • 5150092/51.2*100 = 10058773.4375
  • 4445978/44.2*100 = 10058773.755~
  • 462704/4.6*100 = 10058782.608~

Oh my.

You can try this on your own with made up numbers and you'll notice that it is almost impossible, statistically speaking, for this to happen.

Let's run random numbers from random.org.

  • Total: 6,105,472
  • A: 4,705,638
  • B: 1,399,834. B will be the remainder.

Lets' get some percentages and round them for good measure:

  • A = 77.072468~ Let's say 77.1%
  • B = 22.927531~ Roughly 22.9%

That's 100% right there, so let's derive.

The percentage point is 61054.72

  • A: 4705638/77.1 * 100 = 6103291.828793~
  • B: 1399834/22.9 * 100 = 6112812.227074~

As you can see, we can't derive the total from the percentages, as the percentages were rounded. The variation is well within the percent point error, but unless we have each and every single one of the decimal places of the percentages, we will never know the exact total the numbers come from (there are mathematical ways but they're irrelevant in this analysis).

Looking at the numbers announced, we can only deduce that, statistically speaking, the votes were most likely calculated with exact percentages chosen before hand instead of the percentages being calculated from the votes then rounded. As it is an unlikely probability they were naturally exact.

They made up the results and announced them. There's now plenty of proof that the election was stolen.

[–] TheRealKuni@lemmy.world 6 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

I would give you Lemmy gold if it existed. This is well-written and fascinating.

[–] dustyData@lemmy.world 9 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

Disregard symbolic prizes, share this information with anyone within hear shot. Venezuela is a dictatorship and this election was stolen. People are being murdered in their homes right as we speak to keep a dictator in power. Call your government authorities and pressure them to take this matter seriously and put international pressure on Venezuela for this regime to end.

[–] TheRealKuni@lemmy.world 3 points 3 months ago

I’ve already shared your posts here a few times. I’m not sure what other levers my government has to effect change in Venezuela, but it can’t hurt.

[–] chuckleslord@lemmy.world 4 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Can you share the source of these vote totals? Would love to share this, but need the source to verify.

[–] dustyData@lemmy.world 5 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Yes, you see. Part of the problem is that the absolute only source for those numbers is what the president of the electoral power read during a press conference. Here's a government news source quoting the announcement. There are no more numbers, or anywhere else to verify them. Not even during the proclamation act, the next day, were new numbers given or data updated. Just void rhetoric and crazy statements to deflect attention.

[–] chuckleslord@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago