Bests & Worsts Reviews from Amazon

I'm not a statistics expert, but in the first 10 pages of this book I've already found two significant errors, the latter of which is particularly horrendous. Either the author is clueless about statistics -- a frightening thought since he supposedly teaches statistics as a professor -- or the editing of this book by statistics-clueful people was basically nonexistent. I'll assume the latter, but either way, this book is a blot on O'Reilly's record. Page 5: "The mean will be close to some scores and far away from some others, but if you add up those distances, you get a total that is as small as possible." Wrong. The mean minimizes the sum of SQUARED distances; the MEDIAN minimizes the sum of the distances. Hand-waving on the next page apologizing for how complicated the formula for the standard deviation is because "there are some mathematical complications with summing distances" would suggest to me that the omission of "squared" on page 5 was not a mere typo or a misguided attempt at simplification. OK, sure, one error like that isn't worth trashing a book over, particularly a book for lay people (albeit those with a technical bent). But check out this howler on page 10: "Additive rule: the probability of any one of several independent events occuring is the *sum* of each event's probability." [Emphasis on "sum" is the book's, not mine.] This isn't just plain wrong; it's cringe-inducingly, forehead-slappingly wrong. The additive rule is for any one of several mutually exclusive events occuring, and independent pretty much implies *not* mutually exclusive (the annoying corner cases being those where some events under consideration are completely impossible anyhow). The rule for one of several independent events occuring is more complicated; for example, the probability of a fair coin coming up "heads" on either its first or second flip is obviously not 1, as the author's statement would ridiculously imply, but rather 3/4. In order to do anything with statistics at all, you absolutely MUST understand the basic concepts of "independent" and "mutually exclusive", or you're doomed from the get-go. The fact that this book is for lay people who might not already be clear on these concepts only makes having such an error in it that much less excusable. If the author can't be bothered to stamp out obvious errors like this in the first 10 pages -- particularly the latter -- I can't be bothered to read the rest of it. Maybe the second edition will be worth glancing at, but I'm not holding my breath. (For one thing, the overall writing style in that first 10 pages wasn't particularly lucid either.)