I would say the initial numbers should be embargoed until the number is reliable. People don’t understand error bars and reporting can more easily manipulate the current situation without outright lying.

▲

theptip 13 hours ago | parent | next [-]

No, just report them with error bars. We know the 95th percentile revision size of the distribution.

Moot point as the people who actually act on the data understand how to roll their own anyway.

	▲	jfengel 12 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Error bars would be misleading, because this isn't a sampling error. These start with actual counts. The more important errors are systematic: the definitions of terms, the reporting mechanisms, etc. Except that those things are constant from month to month, so deltas largely cancel them out. The problem isn't in the size of the possible errors, but in understanding what those numbers mean and how they are gathered. That requires far more background reading.

▲

twosdai 13 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Both? I don't think error bars and waiting to release data until more accurate are mutually exclusive.

▲

vlovich123 13 hours ago | parent [-]

That’s what I meant. There should be error bars to reflect uncertainty of the inherent data, but they should wait until all the data that could change things comes in rather than using projections which always drastically change

▲

jmalicki 13 hours ago | parent [-]

No, they shouldn't. Timely estimates as to the best knowledge of our current situation is extremely important for decision making under uncertainty.

If the error bars are large, that is important information to know.

▲

vlovich123 13 hours ago | parent | next [-]

What decisions are so important and time sensitive they depend on these numbers right after a month is over? And also we at one point were making decisions without these numbers yet the quality of the decision making isn’t clearly improved.

▲

jmalicki 12 hours ago | parent [-]

"What kind of stocks should my mutual fund invest in?"

"What sort of startups should I fund?"

"Should my business aggressively hire this quarter anticipating growth, or hold out for a possible recession?"

	▲	vlovich123 11 hours ago \| parent [-]
		A few months of extra no data won’t impact the stock investments if no one has that data. Startup funding is similarly not so time sensitive. As for businesses hiring, they should hire based on their own growth. Using an external signal that itself gets adjusted drastically is similarly problematic; I don’t hire because I think no one else is hiring and the numbers get majorly adjusted up. Similarly I hire a bunch of people and it turns out no one else hired. No one benefits from faster numbers that are majorly shifted in a few months anyway. You wouldn’t make any different decision if no one had the numbers. The only thing you’re doing differently is when the numbers come out your gambling whether or not you think the true number will be revised in some major way in a few months. That’s not helpful for the economy writ large.

▲

win311fwg 13 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> If the error bars are large, that is important information to know.

The data is available. If it were important to the causal reader, however, then those casual readers would have already demanded its presence. But they don't care. What difference does it make to Hilary Homemaker? She just wants to get to say "Did you hear about the bad economic news?" when gossiping with her friends.

Those who need to understand the uncertainty will already be looking at more than a news headline anyway.

▲

parineum 12 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Ah yes, lie to them and withold information because the public is too stupid to understand. Then, when they don't trust you anymore, throw up your hands and say it's not your fault.