2% chance of it being random? That's not exactly thin.
In fact, it is, especially when the researchers seem mystified about any kind of causal relationship. Anything between 1% and 5% is usually considered borderline. These numbers are based on assumptions that are difficult to verify, and it is difficult to calculate the effect when they are violated. Statistics is an art more than a science.
Article 1, section 8: "The Congress shall have power... To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries; "
Judging from this, it's not clear that Congress is even authorized to grant copyright protection to music or other fine arts.
The income tax was first collected in 1863 to pay for the Civil War. It was stopped in 1872, but declared constitutional in 1881. A new income tax was passed in 1894, but declared unconstitutional. This led to the 16th amendment in February 1913, and a new income tax in October of that same year.
One of the original researchers in this field is Benoit Mandelbrot, who applied it to financial markets, showing that price changes are not (as is frequently assumed) gaussian. Why the Financial Times did not pick up on this angle is beyond me.
Slashdot Mirror
In fact, it is, especially when the researchers seem mystified about any kind of causal relationship. Anything between 1% and 5% is usually considered borderline. These numbers are based on assumptions that are difficult to verify, and it is difficult to calculate the effect when they are violated. Statistics is an art more than a science.
Judging from this, it's not clear that Congress is even authorized to grant copyright protection to music or other fine arts.
The income tax was first collected in 1863 to pay for the Civil War. It was stopped in 1872, but declared constitutional in 1881. A new income tax was passed in 1894, but declared unconstitutional. This led to the 16th amendment in February 1913, and a new income tax in October of that same year.
Chi can be detected with the senses.
One of the original researchers in this field is Benoit Mandelbrot, who applied it to financial markets, showing that price changes are not (as is frequently assumed) gaussian. Why the Financial Times did not pick up on this angle is beyond me.