You're comparing apples & oranges, i am not depriving them of sales, unless you expect people to buy content on blind faith?
Besides, i live in Belgium, i already pay 'copy taxes' on empty media and even freaking mp3 players and hard drives, whenever i backup my pictures money floats to the content providers, they already get paid enough, if they or you expect me to actually pay for crap on top of that, well tough cookies.
I agree that he's a dick, but i don't agree it counts as hate speech, as for most offensive thing? I guess he could feed the book to pigs... might be even worse:P
Are you so dense that you can not comprehend simple english? Reread my posts, slowly.
Study 1 uses dataset A and has result X.
Study 2 uses dataset B (wich is A + new data) and has result Z
Based on dataset A, result X is correct, this does not mean that it's true.
Based on dataset B, result Z is correct, this does not mean that it's true.
Both can have the same confidence %, both can conflict, because they are NOT THE SAME.
And that's pointless, if there is global warming we should be planning on how we can either mitigate the problem, or otherwise get through it without starving, or whatever.
In your example, the mistake in his measurement equipment is the new data that means the previous claim is invalid.
In other words, based on the data he had, his claim was valid, once new data is introduced (faulty equipment), the validity of his claim can change.
Look, if i make a study based on current data that predicts with 95% confidence level that event X will happen, then that confidence level is based on said data.
If later new data presents i have to revise my study to account for the new data, and the outcome might be different, even though based on the new study the confidence in the study itself on the new data has the same percentage.
Slashdot Mirror
Doesn't that basically mean he's a prick?
Proper upbringing & a little trust go a long way....
Those were kids pretending to be their parents
Hell, just mentioning the word 'sexually' to some people is enough to get'm against anything
'prohibits minors from purchasing ultraviolent or sexually violent video games without parental consent.'
I have to wonder, remembering the hysteria that Janet Jackson's nipple caused at the super bowl, how much that one word there influenced the vote...
Javascript is crap, it lacks pointers, i want pointers god damn it! And pointers to pointers to an array of pointers!
.. vote Pirate
Why keep medical journals secret? Or do you mean medical files on persons?
Who's throwing puppies you say?
Same in Europe then ;)
But only usable with iMovie
Or your local crackwhore
Aren't there laws against loitering in the States as well?
OMG, you've never seen Total Recall?
You're comparing apples & oranges, i am not depriving them of sales, unless you expect people to buy content on blind faith?
Besides, i live in Belgium, i already pay 'copy taxes' on empty media and even freaking mp3 players and hard drives, whenever i backup my pictures money floats to the content providers, they already get paid enough, if they or you expect me to actually pay for crap on top of that, well tough cookies.
I have over 300 legally purchased DVDs and lost count of my cd's, back to you.
Fuck it, you're not worth my time, i can't make my post any clearer then it already is.
You can respect people, idea's and by extend religion are abstracts and deserve none.
I agree that he's a dick, but i don't agree it counts as hate speech, as for most offensive thing? I guess he could feed the book to pigs... might be even worse :P
Are you so dense that you can not comprehend simple english? Reread my posts, slowly.
Study 1 uses dataset A and has result X.
Study 2 uses dataset B (wich is A + new data) and has result Z
Based on dataset A, result X is correct, this does not mean that it's true.
Based on dataset B, result Z is correct, this does not mean that it's true.
Both can have the same confidence %, both can conflict, because they are NOT THE SAME.
Knowing the greed of humanity? When it's too late.
And that's pointless, if there is global warming we should be planning on how we can either mitigate the problem, or otherwise get through it without starving, or whatever.
We are all going to die. It's the only thing we know for sure.
In your example, the mistake in his measurement equipment is the new data that means the previous claim is invalid.
In other words, based on the data he had, his claim was valid, once new data is introduced (faulty equipment), the validity of his claim can change.
That's all i said basically.
Look, if i make a study based on current data that predicts with 95% confidence level that event X will happen, then that confidence level is based on said data.
If later new data presents i have to revise my study to account for the new data, and the outcome might be different, even though based on the new study the confidence in the study itself on the new data has the same percentage.