Hacker Read

smnrchrds · 2023-08-21 14:04:48

$5.43 -> $6.11 is 12.5% increase, not 1.13%.

bryanlarsen | karma 33883 | avg karma 3.16 · | 2023-07-26 17:26:45

It's inaccurate. An 0.25% increase on 5% is 5.0125%.

bertzzie | karma 547 | avg karma 8.29 · | 2013-01-28 23:24:49

It's increased BY 11$, not FROM 11$. Certainly not 640%.

randomdata | karma 8455 | avg karma 1.21 · | 2022-06-15 15:55:46

You are half right. Per the article body, contradicting the headline, the rates increased by 0.75pp, which is equivalent to 75bp. The previous rates ranged from 0.75% to 1% making the 0.75pp hike a 75-100% increase, not the 0.75% increase you and the incorrect headline claim.

tomsmeding | karma 1360 | avg karma 2.57 · | 2022-04-17 02:41:03

It's 41% increase, not 4% increase.

insane_dreamer | karma 2876 | avg karma 1.93 · | 2022-09-15 11:22:13

$680 -> $1015 is not minor in terms of percentage increase

cbr | karma 3404 | avg karma 3.04 · | 2015-09-23 20:12:08+00:00

It's a 33% increase, or an increase of 1.07 percentage points. It's not a 1.07% increase.

bjourne | karma 11379 | avg karma 2.71 · | 2021-04-08 02:52:31

Huh, that's interesting. How come your link claims the increase was 1.5% while mine claims it was 7.7%?

cookiecaper | karma 15526 | avg karma 2.53 · | 2009-11-03 07:07:49

That still doesn't make sense. Shouldn't it be an increase to 5.8% from 4.8%?

realPubkey | karma 555 | avg karma 2.21 · | 2023-09-26 09:15:22

10% increase, not 10% in total.

simlevesque | karma 2715 | avg karma 2.38 · | 2017-11-27 16:20:29+00:00

From 4 to 6 is a 50% increase, not 150%.

nsomaru | karma 2353 | avg karma 3.03 · | 2011-09-21 06:10:48

A 47% increase is not 'doubled'. 100% increase = doubled.

harlanlewis | karma 1124 | avg karma 3.31 · | 2016-05-04 23:06:20+00:00

Others might read that as 600% change, not 1.5%.

FabHK | karma 14253 | avg karma 2.82 · | 2024-01-10 19:42:00

Minor mistake:

> a rise from 5% to 15% is a 300% increase, relative to the anchor point

No, it's a 200% increase. (It's 300% of what it used to be, which is a 200% increase on top of the original 100%.)

reply

Jackstone | karma 10 | avg karma 10.0 · | 2013-07-28 21:40:10+00:00

.136% to .424% is a 211% increase.

bmitc | karma 14276 | avg karma 3.06 · | 2022-11-29 21:48:42

It's just over 12%. That isn't a large increase?

nextstep | karma 2931 | avg karma 3.97 · | 2014-09-06 16:57:45+00:00

They likely did that to make the increase seem more significant. A "6 percent increase" to 44.4 years is an increase of only 2.5 years.

jimbob45 | karma 2632 | avg karma 0.98 · | 2022-05-04 15:49:28

Can anyone please explain why the graph shows a 0.25% rate increase, yet the headline describes a 0.5% rate increase? I'm sure I'm being a moron and missing something.

yorwba | karma 12391 | avg karma 2.31 · | 2017-08-25 04:21:49+00:00

Yeah, 1.047 * 1.047 - 1 ˜ 9.6%. If the original agreement was for one year 4.7% and the next 4.1%, the increase would be 1.047 * 1.041 - 1 ˜ 9.0%. Maybe it was a rounding error.

a_ba | karma 16 | avg karma 2.29 · | 2022-06-15 15:42:55

Actually, the raise is 0.75%p (percentage points). Not 0,75% as the headline states