Not sure why anyone would think this is expensive . If it has a 4 year warrantyaccidental , plus the i 7 CPU , OLED . etc , I think it ' s priced right . I just paid 2 , 060 for the same config with only a 1 year accidental plan . My savings was in a 10 % credit to my Dell account that I will use for the 4 year warranty . This makes sense that you would pay 2400 for a loaded 13 r 3 . <| sep |> Oh god yes <| sep |> Currently have a g 502 , how ' s this in comparison ? <| sep |> I ' ll agree with you on language . I wrote this up quickly and haven ' t had a chance to correct it or even finish it . As people ask more questions it ' s tough to both juggle the questions , updating the R 1 and work . The user is observing the current rate by calculating the mean . The calculation of this statistic , if we assume only the existence of some r . v . for the amount donated in a period with some mean and some variance for this distribution , must be close to the mean of this distribution . The observance of closeness does not imply the existence of a bot even given perfect measurement and perfect calculation . His prediction does not provide strong evidence for his assumption of a bot . If the rate remains close to his average after 28 hours that would be reasonable even given the high variance provided by a seasonal trend that sees more donated at some time than others . I ' d like to take this base result and examine it in different economic contexts . If we make different assumptions on how people value a recount and how they arrive at the information that there is a recount petition we ' d like to see how this perturbs the result . For example if we assume instant awareness why should donations be trickling in over time ? My main point is that correlation in the sample in this case hurts our knowledge about the future rate of donations , but in the case of the Edison Research election exit poll it helps .