True, but in the absence of any strong information about what changes, treating the correlation as weak is a good assumption. And even if one of the numbers is a factor of 2 off, it doesn’t change my point—it was already a back-of-the-napkin kind of thing.
True, but in the absence of any strong information about what changes, treating the correlation as weak is a good assumption. And even if one of the numbers is a factor of 2 off, it doesn’t change my point—it was already a back-of-the-napkin kind of thing.