Why in the HELL are you using a spreadsheet for REGRESSION ANALYSIS? ARE YOU MAD?
Seriously, if you NEED to do data analysis get a Statistical Package (SPSS will even do in a pinch), such as: SAS, R, S+ or even Systat. Need other stuff? Lisrel, EQS, and many others are out there. Many of them run on Unix/Linux. No offense, but regression is NOT meant to be done in a spreadsheet. Personally, I like R (control), SAS and even EQS is good for regression (EQS, for the uninitiated, is a Structural Equation Modeling program (SEM)--it also does CFA and EFA (Factor Analysis), as well as other stuff).
I cringe when I hear of folks using excel for data analysis. Yes, you can, but it isn't good for much.
You know, interestingly enough, even though I don't have much against globalization, I still hate the world bank! Amazing, huh?
Globalization, short of virtually every gov't in the WORLD passing laws against multinational corporations, WILL happen. It is inevitable. At some point, governments will do the same thing (EU, perhaps), and eventually, someone will find a way to create a TRULY effective multinational gov't.
The US was an attempt at such. The concept was largely independent states united in an effort to protect themselves from more powerful enemies, such as (at the time) England. Originally (as I understand it), the concept was for states to retain most of the power, but the fed to have power for defense against foreign powers, and to make sure that no state did anything to violate the constitution.
The real possibility is not an OS, but a windows abstraction layer for linux (ala WINE) that really works. Would it violate his NDA? Probably, but that's his choice, and probably (in this scenario) underwritten by Google. Would I do it? Not likely, but I can't say for sure. It depends on their side of the contract, how the terms are written, etc.
Are NDA's truly enforceable? (As in, what is the guy's compensation for adherence beyond the term of his employment? OR, does the law allow for this type of contract?)
Read Poetics some time (by Aristotle). I believe the tragic (flawed) hero is covered in that work (I may be mistaken--can't find my own copy right now).
You are wrong, though. Read some of the Greek tragedies and then come back to me, and you'll have a different idea. Does Achilles ring a bell, perhaps? Think about it.
I am going to respond to a number of posts here, because they are all relevant.
First, Excel is not a database--no spreadsheet is. I use spreadsheets for a variety of things. I even use excel/OO.o for data entry and prep BEFORE I send it to SPSS/EQS/R for analysis (SPSS stinks for things like normalizing variances, combining questions, etc). Too much of what you say is talking about using Excel for tracking large amounts of inventory. This is useful, but your main data storage should NOT be in a spreadsheet. It should be in a db (and excel can then do an odbc lookup for the data, and so can OO.o).
Second. Excel should NEVER be used for statistical analysis. Especially anything more complex than a Standard Deviation (which they calculate for the population, not the sample, which could cause minor deviations) or MAYBE a correlation (I haven't checked that formula recently, so I don't know exactly how they calculate it). If you are doing analysis/stats, get a stats package. If you are a programmer, R will work (or SAS or...), if not SPSS is usable. SPSS also is limited to what the designers foresaw when they wrote the package, but I digress.
As far as it goes, yes I hope the guy was joking. Support for that many rows indicates that you have grown to the point where you REALLY need more than just a spreadsheet--you NEED a database. REALLY.
As a note, I tend use it for smaller stuff-tracking grades, data entry for stats, etc. I think that's what a spreadsheet is perfect for. Not tracking a year's worth of financial reports. There are accounting packages that do that, and do it well, that don't cost that much more than a single license for MS Office 2003. Get one.
I have to agree with others here--it wouldn't bother me a bit (as a person who frequently gets labelled as a right-wing religious nut, but views himself as fairly tolerant and open about various ideas).
To me, there are so many ways that this fits in with what the Bible posits as the creation of the world, and then what my personal beliefs are. To me, it matters VERY LITTLE how the earth was formed and life began. I believe that God is responsible for it, and I also believe that he works through an advanced understanding of physics that makes us look like the savages that are still curious about that hot red stuff, but haven't discovered that you can cook stuff with it.
Would the discovery of microbes on Mars make any difference on religion? No. Would there be a few individuals who would either lose their faith, abandon their belief or otherwise be impacted? Almost certainly. A number of folks would also deny the discovery outright. They are the true nuts (listen to George Nory (sp?) for a sample).
Personally, I say that if there is life elsewhere in the universe, God is also responsible for that, and he created it for a reason, whatever that is. The Bible, for all its worth as a behavioral guide, and wealth of prophecy, fairly stinks as a theological guide. The problem is that the authors mostly wrote for an audience that were familiar with the basic stuff (and therefore don't explain it very well, if at all), or needed correction (in the mind of the author) on specific points. Even direct quotes from Christ are generally of this nature. Many in his audience were well studied on the topics he addressed, and therefore his speech was centered on corrections and changes.
The Old Testament is equally bad. From the very beginning there is an assumption that the reader understands what is meant by God. The most specific and basic areas of instruction are not, however, theological, but commandment. This is all in the Torah. The remainder of the OT is all about the different trials and tribulations of the Jews OR prophecies regarding the Messiah. While some of this does present a moralistic tale, the concept of a clear doctrine and theology has been largely omitted.
Furthermore, the New Testament suffers a different problem. Certain basics are assumed, and then the point is made to convince people that the New way is better than the Old, or to clarify specific points of doctrine that had already been explained.
In a practical sense, this results in there being a large number of views regarding the specifics of basic theology. This also means that there is very little (if any) information on what else God created, other than the general "everything". Personally, I think that we are VERY likely to meet intelligent life in other parts of the universe if we ever get there (I doubt it), and even if it took a radically different form, this would have little impact on my personal views.
That is where, as you probably know, religion and science depart ways--science requires evidence. This is good. Religion requires faith. This can also be good. However, where many religious folks get into trouble is when they deny evidence. This is foolish.
Being in Industrial Psych, I find this conversation absolutely fascinating--one of my major interests (other than motivation/behavior) is ability measurement. To me, chess ability (raw ability, not trained) is a combination of pattern recognition, spatial manipulation and logical reasoning. I DON'T think that anyone has ever taken a look at it though.
Maybe I will suggest this research to one of the profs in my department and we'll take a look at it.
Yes, but no offense, your parents should have watched you a bit closer, and done what they could to prevent you from bullying your brother. That is part of the parents job--monitoring sibling interactions.
I agree--parents are more to blame than the video game--although just keeping your kids from playing the game is NOT the complete answer (it may or may not be a part of it, however).
wow, a response that addressed my questions--hat's off to you!
There are few things to consider, however. Even though much of the land is being used, a good portion of it is used for farming, and some farmers are being paid gov't subsidies to reduce production. With biodiesel, this can stop, and farmers will be rewarded heavily for overproducing to a large degree.
The real question is this: once you start making a switch to biodiesel, is it sustainable. That is, can an economy work entirely off biodiesel, and not need to import another energy source.
Personally, I think a combo of electric/biodiesel cars coupbled with nuclear energy (I favor it) would solve many of the problems today.
Yes, that is a valid point, but not one that most people will equate with global warming. Remember that the average person is MUCH more interested in easy to see links, not chaotic happenings that, while theoretically linked, are seemingly random.
You can tell folks that unusually hard hurricane season is a result of global warming until you're blue in the face, but unless alaska starts to look like southern cali, you're going to have a tough time convincing many people (even statistically/scientifically trained folks).
Skeptics with absolutely NO knowledge of Jewish society at the time.
Joseph would very reasonably go to Bethlehem to pay taxes if his lineage was through Bethlehem (as it was)--that is if his MOTHER's family was traditionally through that city (since Joseph, like Mary, was a descedent of King David, they were). The taxes, quite simply, were levied by the Romans, but collected by the Jews, and in the traditional Jewish manner, thus according to the city of ancestry. For this reason, it was fairly logical that Joseph went to Bethlehem.
The next part is simple: the "of Nazereth" part is a reflection of where people who met him after he started teaching publicly (age 30, as according to Jewish custom) thought he was from. It was not common knowledge that he was born in Bethlehem--remember that Herod had all the 2 yr olds born in that vicinity killed to prevent the uprising of a native king.
Records of the Roman census? That one is trickier, and I don't have my references handy. I do know that there is one recorded in non-Biblical records--I THINK Josephus, but I am not certain. Why is it mentioned in only on of the Gospels? That's easy--either the writers didn't feel it important to their intended audience (which was different for them all), or it was removed by some interprising scribe at some point (happened a fair bit).
All in all, I don't think the scholars you refer to are very well informed. The debate is pretty muted.
It's the same reason that one of my friends (who happens to be remodeling a home), won't bring their house up to code elictrically--or even install somthing simple like a 220volt outlet. ANY electrical work that is done MUST be inspected by a master electrician (licensed) and MUST bring the ENTIRE house up to code.
Therefore, he does nothing, thereby endangering both himself and his wife much more than if they could just do some of the work (or hire an electrician to do a portion of the work).
You are going to have to explain that to me. Since when does something that is produced in limited runs on moderate equipment end up being cheaper than something that is mass-produced on an efficient and modern process?
REAL AMERICAN==NATIVE AMERICAN//eg Navajo, Sioux, etc.
He may not be joking.
It may or may not be a bad idea.
You never can tell.
Of course, even the Native Americans were from somewhere else at one point. I don't think any body has ever argued (from an evolutionary/anthropological POV) that life started on the American Continent. So if you emptied the whole AC, then emissions wouldn't be a problem here. Of course, Europe and Asia would get much worse!
Let me put it this way--the GP had a POINT. It will NEVER persuade an American that you are right if you sit around (or walk around--your preference) telling them how ignorant, arrogant, and selfish they are. I recognize that in some countries it is not uncommon to get into rather heated discussions where name calling is acceptable (and even expected), but in the US, such is frowned upon in business (/. doesn't count), and by professionals.
Personally, I think that if you had paid attention, you would have realized that what was being said is important. Most of us living in the US are NOT living in high-population density areas. The weather has not changed significantly in 30+ years (lifespan or more for many of us), and there is little evidence that it will (from a practical, hey it's 20 degrees C below today in Miami FL. type of perspective).
You want to convince mainstream America living in Podunk Iowa that global warming is important AND that the economic downturn resulting from accepting the Kyoto treaty is worthwhile? Then you need to figure out first how to get and maintain, the interest of the Americans who count. Our folks in Congress know political suicide when they see it, and anything that hurts the economy is likely to be political suicide. It takes serious support from voters (who are fickle at best) AND some serious courage for them to go against the grain.
BTW, many Americans view Europeans as arrogant, snobbish types, but we all know that there are arrogant, ignorant pricks on both sides of the pond. Laters.
My first thought was along those lines too. I mean, if I write a book and call it "Foundation", set it in a SF universe and talk about psyhohistory, it would be purely coincidental, right?
Folks, the movie was a bad enough idea, but a short story. COME ON. There are millions of other possible titles. Get a grip!
Correct--we do not "see" the "light" from the sun. We see the sun, and the objects illuminated thereby, but not the light itself. According to many vision researchers, it is impossible to see light, and always will be.
Seriously, the nv drivers suck at 3D largely because nvidia does not open their specs sufficiently. I, along with everyone else, would like them to, but personally, I think that's a ways out. They release a good driver though, and I am happy with it.
Sadly, it is NOT that hard to get a PhD and not know how to avoid run-on sentences or how to avoid making aggregious grammatical and syntactical errors.
Slashdot Mirror
Why in the HELL are you using a spreadsheet for REGRESSION ANALYSIS? ARE YOU MAD?
Seriously, if you NEED to do data analysis get a Statistical Package (SPSS will even do in a pinch), such as: SAS, R, S+ or even Systat. Need other stuff? Lisrel, EQS, and many others are out there. Many of them run on Unix/Linux. No offense, but regression is NOT meant to be done in a spreadsheet. Personally, I like R (control), SAS and even EQS is good for regression (EQS, for the uninitiated, is a Structural Equation Modeling program (SEM)--it also does CFA and EFA (Factor Analysis), as well as other stuff).
I cringe when I hear of folks using excel for data analysis. Yes, you can, but it isn't good for much.
You know, interestingly enough, even though I don't have much against globalization, I still hate the world bank! Amazing, huh?
Globalization, short of virtually every gov't in the WORLD passing laws against multinational corporations, WILL happen. It is inevitable. At some point, governments will do the same thing (EU, perhaps), and eventually, someone will find a way to create a TRULY effective multinational gov't.
The US was an attempt at such. The concept was largely independent states united in an effort to protect themselves from more powerful enemies, such as (at the time) England. Originally (as I understand it), the concept was for states to retain most of the power, but the fed to have power for defense against foreign powers, and to make sure that no state did anything to violate the constitution.
How far we have strayed...
Maybe, maybe not. It doesn't matter much.
The real possibility is not an OS, but a windows abstraction layer for linux (ala WINE) that really works. Would it violate his NDA? Probably, but that's his choice, and probably (in this scenario) underwritten by Google. Would I do it? Not likely, but I can't say for sure. It depends on their side of the contract, how the terms are written, etc.
Are NDA's truly enforceable? (As in, what is the guy's compensation for adherence beyond the term of his employment? OR, does the law allow for this type of contract?)
Who knows? IANAL, so I don't.
Read Poetics some time (by Aristotle). I believe the tragic (flawed) hero is covered in that work (I may be mistaken--can't find my own copy right now).
You are wrong, though. Read some of the Greek tragedies and then come back to me, and you'll have a different idea. Does Achilles ring a bell, perhaps? Think about it.
ACK!
...), if not SPSS is usable. SPSS also is limited to what the designers foresaw when they wrote the package, but I digress.
I am going to respond to a number of posts here, because they are all relevant.
First, Excel is not a database--no spreadsheet is. I use spreadsheets for a variety of things. I even use excel/OO.o for data entry and prep BEFORE I send it to SPSS/EQS/R for analysis (SPSS stinks for things like normalizing variances, combining questions, etc). Too much of what you say is talking about using Excel for tracking large amounts of inventory. This is useful, but your main data storage should NOT be in a spreadsheet. It should be in a db (and excel can then do an odbc lookup for the data, and so can OO.o).
Second. Excel should NEVER be used for statistical analysis. Especially anything more complex than a Standard Deviation (which they calculate for the population, not the sample, which could cause minor deviations) or MAYBE a correlation (I haven't checked that formula recently, so I don't know exactly how they calculate it). If you are doing analysis/stats, get a stats package. If you are a programmer, R will work (or SAS or
As far as it goes, yes I hope the guy was joking. Support for that many rows indicates that you have grown to the point where you REALLY need more than just a spreadsheet--you NEED a database. REALLY.
As a note, I tend use it for smaller stuff-tracking grades, data entry for stats, etc. I think that's what a spreadsheet is perfect for. Not tracking a year's worth of financial reports. There are accounting packages that do that, and do it well, that don't cost that much more than a single license for MS Office 2003. Get one.
i hope you are trying to be funny
I hadn't ever endured that previously. Thanks for making my ears bleed--now I have to explain the blood to my supervisor. Gaah!
precisely.
erm.
I have to agree with others here--it wouldn't bother me a bit (as a person who frequently gets labelled as a right-wing religious nut, but views himself as fairly tolerant and open about various ideas).
To me, there are so many ways that this fits in with what the Bible posits as the creation of the world, and then what my personal beliefs are. To me, it matters VERY LITTLE how the earth was formed and life began. I believe that God is responsible for it, and I also believe that he works through an advanced understanding of physics that makes us look like the savages that are still curious about that hot red stuff, but haven't discovered that you can cook stuff with it.
Would the discovery of microbes on Mars make any difference on religion? No. Would there be a few individuals who would either lose their faith, abandon their belief or otherwise be impacted? Almost certainly. A number of folks would also deny the discovery outright. They are the true nuts (listen to George Nory (sp?) for a sample).
Personally, I say that if there is life elsewhere in the universe, God is also responsible for that, and he created it for a reason, whatever that is. The Bible, for all its worth as a behavioral guide, and wealth of prophecy, fairly stinks as a theological guide. The problem is that the authors mostly wrote for an audience that were familiar with the basic stuff (and therefore don't explain it very well, if at all), or needed correction (in the mind of the author) on specific points. Even direct quotes from Christ are generally of this nature. Many in his audience were well studied on the topics he addressed, and therefore his speech was centered on corrections and changes.
The Old Testament is equally bad. From the very beginning there is an assumption that the reader understands what is meant by God. The most specific and basic areas of instruction are not, however, theological, but commandment. This is all in the Torah. The remainder of the OT is all about the different trials and tribulations of the Jews OR prophecies regarding the Messiah. While some of this does present a moralistic tale, the concept of a clear doctrine and theology has been largely omitted.
Furthermore, the New Testament suffers a different problem. Certain basics are assumed, and then the point is made to convince people that the New way is better than the Old, or to clarify specific points of doctrine that had already been explained.
In a practical sense, this results in there being a large number of views regarding the specifics of basic theology. This also means that there is very little (if any) information on what else God created, other than the general "everything". Personally, I think that we are VERY likely to meet intelligent life in other parts of the universe if we ever get there (I doubt it), and even if it took a radically different form, this would have little impact on my personal views.
That is where, as you probably know, religion and science depart ways--science requires evidence. This is good. Religion requires faith. This can also be good. However, where many religious folks get into trouble is when they deny evidence. This is foolish.
I would write more, but I am VERY tired.
Good night
Being in Industrial Psych, I find this conversation absolutely fascinating--one of my major interests (other than motivation/behavior) is ability measurement. To me, chess ability (raw ability, not trained) is a combination of pattern recognition, spatial manipulation and logical reasoning. I DON'T think that anyone has ever taken a look at it though.
Maybe I will suggest this research to one of the profs in my department and we'll take a look at it.
I love their german chocolate danish--yum!
And most of their sourdough sandwiches.
I'm not vegan/vegetarian, but I also love the portabella sandwhich.
YUM YUM.
Yes, but no offense, your parents should have watched you a bit closer, and done what they could to prevent you from bullying your brother. That is part of the parents job--monitoring sibling interactions.
I agree--parents are more to blame than the video game--although just keeping your kids from playing the game is NOT the complete answer (it may or may not be a part of it, however).
wow, a response that addressed my questions--hat's off to you!
There are few things to consider, however. Even though much of the land is being used, a good portion of it is used for farming, and some farmers are being paid gov't subsidies to reduce production. With biodiesel, this can stop, and farmers will be rewarded heavily for overproducing to a large degree.
The real question is this: once you start making a switch to biodiesel, is it sustainable. That is, can an economy work entirely off biodiesel, and not need to import another energy source.
Personally, I think a combo of electric/biodiesel cars coupbled with nuclear energy (I favor it) would solve many of the problems today.
Yes, that is a valid point, but not one that most people will equate with global warming. Remember that the average person is MUCH more interested in easy to see links, not chaotic happenings that, while theoretically linked, are seemingly random.
You can tell folks that unusually hard hurricane season is a result of global warming until you're blue in the face, but unless alaska starts to look like southern cali, you're going to have a tough time convincing many people (even statistically/scientifically trained folks).
Good luck, though.
Skeptics with absolutely NO knowledge of Jewish society at the time.
Joseph would very reasonably go to Bethlehem to pay taxes if his lineage was through Bethlehem (as it was)--that is if his MOTHER's family was traditionally through that city (since Joseph, like Mary, was a descedent of King David, they were). The taxes, quite simply, were levied by the Romans, but collected by the Jews, and in the traditional Jewish manner, thus according to the city of ancestry. For this reason, it was fairly logical that Joseph went to Bethlehem.
The next part is simple: the "of Nazereth" part is a reflection of where people who met him after he started teaching publicly (age 30, as according to Jewish custom) thought he was from. It was not common knowledge that he was born in Bethlehem--remember that Herod had all the 2 yr olds born in that vicinity killed to prevent the uprising of a native king.
Records of the Roman census? That one is trickier, and I don't have my references handy. I do know that there is one recorded in non-Biblical records--I THINK Josephus, but I am not certain. Why is it mentioned in only on of the Gospels? That's easy--either the writers didn't feel it important to their intended audience (which was different for them all), or it was removed by some interprising scribe at some point (happened a fair bit).
All in all, I don't think the scholars you refer to are very well informed. The debate is pretty muted.
Thank you.
It's the same reason that one of my friends (who happens to be remodeling a home), won't bring their house up to code elictrically--or even install somthing simple like a 220volt outlet. ANY electrical work that is done MUST be inspected by a master electrician (licensed) and MUST bring the ENTIRE house up to code.
Therefore, he does nothing, thereby endangering both himself and his wife much more than if they could just do some of the work (or hire an electrician to do a portion of the work).
You are going to have to explain that to me. Since when does something that is produced in limited runs on moderate equipment end up being cheaper than something that is mass-produced on an efficient and modern process?
I am very curious.
REAL AMERICAN==NATIVE AMERICAN //eg Navajo, Sioux, etc.
He may not be joking.
It may or may not be a bad idea.
You never can tell.
Of course, even the Native Americans were from somewhere else at one point. I don't think any body has ever argued (from an evolutionary/anthropological POV) that life started on the American Continent. So if you emptied the whole AC, then emissions wouldn't be a problem here. Of course, Europe and Asia would get much worse!
At the risk of feeding a troll::
Let me put it this way--the GP had a POINT. It will NEVER persuade an American that you are right if you sit around (or walk around--your preference) telling them how ignorant, arrogant, and selfish they are. I recognize that in some countries it is not uncommon to get into rather heated discussions where name calling is acceptable (and even expected), but in the US, such is frowned upon in business (/. doesn't count), and by professionals.
Personally, I think that if you had paid attention, you would have realized that what was being said is important. Most of us living in the US are NOT living in high-population density areas. The weather has not changed significantly in 30+ years (lifespan or more for many of us), and there is little evidence that it will (from a practical, hey it's 20 degrees C below today in Miami FL. type of perspective).
You want to convince mainstream America living in Podunk Iowa that global warming is important AND that the economic downturn resulting from accepting the Kyoto treaty is worthwhile? Then you need to figure out first how to get and maintain, the interest of the Americans who count. Our folks in Congress know political suicide when they see it, and anything that hurts the economy is likely to be political suicide. It takes serious support from voters (who are fickle at best) AND some serious courage for them to go against the grain.
BTW, many Americans view Europeans as arrogant, snobbish types, but we all know that there are arrogant, ignorant pricks on both sides of the pond. Laters.
My first thought was along those lines too. I mean, if I write a book and call it "Foundation", set it in a SF universe and talk about psyhohistory, it would be purely coincidental, right?
Folks, the movie was a bad enough idea, but a short story. COME ON. There are millions of other possible titles. Get a grip!
But that's what makes cats so wonderful--they leave the more interesting parts for you to see.
Correct--we do not "see" the "light" from the sun. We see the sun, and the objects illuminated thereby, but not the light itself. According to many vision researchers, it is impossible to see light, and always will be.
Oh well.
Not bloody likely.
Seriously, the nv drivers suck at 3D largely because nvidia does not open their specs sufficiently. I, along with everyone else, would like them to, but personally, I think that's a ways out. They release a good driver though, and I am happy with it.
well, and I don't, so there. i'll try to keep the two separate in the futur.
Sadly, it is NOT that hard to get a PhD and not know how to avoid run-on sentences or how to avoid making aggregious grammatical and syntactical errors.
I have to agree, though, the name is fishy.