A single number is useless for most rating systems. A graph is what we need - one that would distantly show multiple peaks. Then you would know that while most dislike a show, those that like it really LOVE it.
That sounds like exactly what Neilson ratings are. They break it out into age groups, sex, and good or bad ratings.
Also, last I checked, the gamergate movement was about favorable coverage given to a woman who was sleeping with a journalist, but I guess it is your job to report on every action taken by a group of people you don't know, and just assume you know everything about.
What proof is given that anyone is behaving poorly? Is it known that none of these supposed men watched and did not enjoy these shows? Is it 100% for sure these people posting poor reviews are even men? Do we know for a fact that any of them are out to sabotage anything and not just giving their personal opinion of the show from their experience watching it?
Wow, you are even more psychic than FiveThirtyEight, you even know what kind of men they are, and not just that they are men who are "sabotaging the online reviews of TV shows aimed at women", without any kind of interaction with them to even determine that they are actually men, and that they aren't just giving their honest opinions of the show.
I was wondering how FiveThirtyEight was able to tell the sex of the reviewers with any kind of accuracy. Did they do DNA testing to determine, or are they just assuming that the people labeling themselves men in their account's sex field are all men? Or, even better, why is it that these could not be legitimate reviews from men who didn't like the show when their wives made them watch it?
If a Chinese, state sponsored, cyberattack were to cause a nuclear missile (somehow...) to launch and take out DC, would you consider that good enough to start a war? If not, why not?
It seemed to work out well for most of those in the book. Frankly, if it wasn't for the lack of an actual US government (in the book), I would say we pretty much already live there.
The crime is in the coercion. You can willingly share all of your things, but when you try to force others who don't want to live that way, that is criminal. What indication is there that this bank earned their money in a "bad" way?
I find it funny that you still point to Bush as if he caused the crash when the crash was caused by Clinton. I do believe I have even corrected you on this previously.
I find it funny that that article has this little gem:
Commentators, including former President Clinton in 2008 and the American Bankers Association in January 2010, have also argued that the ability of commercial banking firms to acquire securities firms (and of securities firms to convert into bank holding companies) helped mitigate the financial crisis.[14]
since the whole crisis was caused in the first place by the banking deregulation he signed that allowed for speculation on mortgages that should never have been used as investment mechanisms in the first place.
Isn't slowing the drug trade a worthy enough cause in your book than?
It is a worthy enough cause that Mexico wants to help fund a wall. Perhaps you should learn a little about the world before trying to paint everyone as racists.
The fact of the matter is that 100% of illegal immigrants have committed a crime, that crime is called illegal immigration, and is punishable by deportation. Anything that reduces the crime rate of people entering the US is a good thing, as these people apparently have no regard for the laws of the US as they break them entering our country.
Inheriting $40-$200 million, and turning it into $4-$8.7 billion is being successful, I don't care if it matches the growth of the S&P, anyone who lives comfortably and still increases their net worth like that is successful.
and the fact that Hillary had the server wiped, which means that no one knows if the server was compromised and all that classified information that was on it was gathered by foreign actors.
Thank you for teaching me something new. I always assumed that whitewash was just white paint, I had no idea how much more complicated it was than that.
The Amazon Echo also doesn't have a microphone off button, the Google Home device they showed has this button on the back side of the device.
I loved how in the C-Net video the woman was slamming Google about privacy while comparing the device to the Amazon Echo, which is always on and listening. It is entirely possible that she totally missed the mute button on it as she said there were no buttons on the device.
That offers the additional benefit of not needing to constantly check your speedometer to see if you are "safely" above the posted limit.
If I just drive, and don't check my speedometer, I will most assuredly be going well over the legal 10mph over the posted speed limit (Maryland law). If I just flow with traffic, or rely on my ability to read every road sign to gauge my speed I will be running 15-20 over the speed limit. If you have trouble with these things, perhaps you are the one who is an issue.
I check the speedometer for what it is used for, to keep my speed down into the legal range, not to make sure I am only going 15 over the speed limit.
Perhaps you are the one who needs to go back to driver's education, as it seems you don't know what a speedometer is for.
Slashdot Mirror
A single number is useless for most rating systems. A graph is what we need - one that would distantly show multiple peaks. Then you would know that while most dislike a show, those that like it really LOVE it.
That sounds like exactly what Neilson ratings are. They break it out into age groups, sex, and good or bad ratings.
Really? Where?
Also, last I checked, the gamergate movement was about favorable coverage given to a woman who was sleeping with a journalist, but I guess it is your job to report on every action taken by a group of people you don't know, and just assume you know everything about.
Most likely a man that is being forced by his wife...not that I have any experience with that for the past 10 years...freedom is great!
What proof is given that anyone is behaving poorly? Is it known that none of these supposed men watched and did not enjoy these shows? Is it 100% for sure these people posting poor reviews are even men? Do we know for a fact that any of them are out to sabotage anything and not just giving their personal opinion of the show from their experience watching it?
Wow, just wow, now we need to censor content that is entirely non sexual because it sexualizes the character? WTF!
Wow, you are even more psychic than FiveThirtyEight, you even know what kind of men they are, and not just that they are men who are "sabotaging the online reviews of TV shows aimed at women", without any kind of interaction with them to even determine that they are actually men, and that they aren't just giving their honest opinions of the show.
I was wondering how FiveThirtyEight was able to tell the sex of the reviewers with any kind of accuracy. Did they do DNA testing to determine, or are they just assuming that the people labeling themselves men in their account's sex field are all men? Or, even better, why is it that these could not be legitimate reviews from men who didn't like the show when their wives made them watch it?
If a Chinese, state sponsored, cyberattack were to cause a nuclear missile (somehow...) to launch and take out DC, would you consider that good enough to start a war? If not, why not?
It seemed to work out well for most of those in the book. Frankly, if it wasn't for the lack of an actual US government (in the book), I would say we pretty much already live there.
APK loves agreeing with himself as well, it could just be another of his ploys to achieve recognition of his "genius".
Please, point to any evidence of the US government in any way supporting ISIS, or supporting Al Qaeda in the past 10 years.
Did you just make that up, or are you posting from a conspiracy theory group?
The crime is in the coercion. You can willingly share all of your things, but when you try to force others who don't want to live that way, that is criminal. What indication is there that this bank earned their money in a "bad" way?
I find it funny that you still point to Bush as if he caused the crash when the crash was caused by Clinton. I do believe I have even corrected you on this previously.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
I find it funny that that article has this little gem:
Commentators, including former President Clinton in 2008 and the American Bankers Association in January 2010, have also argued that the ability of commercial banking firms to acquire securities firms (and of securities firms to convert into bank holding companies) helped mitigate the financial crisis.[14]
since the whole crisis was caused in the first place by the banking deregulation he signed that allowed for speculation on mortgages that should never have been used as investment mechanisms in the first place.
Some feel that the death penalty is a mercy over a real life sentence having to live with the guilt on your conscience of what you did.
Did we finally find APK's registered account?
Isn't slowing the drug trade a worthy enough cause in your book than?
It is a worthy enough cause that Mexico wants to help fund a wall. Perhaps you should learn a little about the world before trying to paint everyone as racists.
The fact of the matter is that 100% of illegal immigrants have committed a crime, that crime is called illegal immigration, and is punishable by deportation. Anything that reduces the crime rate of people entering the US is a good thing, as these people apparently have no regard for the laws of the US as they break them entering our country.
That wouldn't be a very useful construction.
Inheriting $40-$200 million, and turning it into $4-$8.7 billion is being successful, I don't care if it matches the growth of the S&P, anyone who lives comfortably and still increases their net worth like that is successful.
Yeah, this story reminded me of this other story:
https://politics.slashdot.org/...
and the fact that Hillary had the server wiped, which means that no one knows if the server was compromised and all that classified information that was on it was gathered by foreign actors.
It doesn't concern you that foreign hackers might learn information that could be used to blackmail a sitting president?
Thank you for teaching me something new. I always assumed that whitewash was just white paint, I had no idea how much more complicated it was than that.
No, they go for the whole Big Beautiful Women there, as it is a sign of affluence to have any bodyfat at all.
Didn't that get released as the Chromecast? Did the Nexus Q really have more functionality than the Chromecast?
The Amazon Echo also doesn't have a microphone off button, the Google Home device they showed has this button on the back side of the device.
I loved how in the C-Net video the woman was slamming Google about privacy while comparing the device to the Amazon Echo, which is always on and listening. It is entirely possible that she totally missed the mute button on it as she said there were no buttons on the device.
That offers the additional benefit of not needing to constantly check your speedometer to see if you are "safely" above the posted limit.
If I just drive, and don't check my speedometer, I will most assuredly be going well over the legal 10mph over the posted speed limit (Maryland law). If I just flow with traffic, or rely on my ability to read every road sign to gauge my speed I will be running 15-20 over the speed limit. If you have trouble with these things, perhaps you are the one who is an issue.
I check the speedometer for what it is used for, to keep my speed down into the legal range, not to make sure I am only going 15 over the speed limit.
Perhaps you are the one who needs to go back to driver's education, as it seems you don't know what a speedometer is for.