I'm seeing a pattern with you. No, one does not need to look into methodology when a topic is unknowable. If the method is rigorous, then it is misapplied or the results don't actually show what TFS says it shows.
It's fun and easy to mock these cases in hindsight. What a bubble! Fake company! No revenue! Etc. And, I'm with you in the mocking. But what gets lost is that before the crash, really smart people bet on this company. I'm not talking about investors. A friend left his home city and great director-level job to take a higher level position in a new city at this company. He is a smart guy. He was excited. He truly believed he was making the clearly right decision.
My point is that if all we do is laugh, we don't recognize that we could have been my friend. We should be learning from this, not mocking it as a stupidity we could never run into ourselves.
For the millionth time on record, entities abuse the language of science to make unscientific claims to push a political agenda. The good news is this story can serve as a self assessment. If you find it remotely plausible that through science we have found evidence of this so compelling to overcome alternative explanations beyond tolerable error, then you now know you do not understand science. Metaknowledge is difficult to obtain, so this really is a uniquely valuable opportunity.
It's worse than that. The second doctor likely knows it's a second opinion. And you likely picked a doctor that might not give you the same diagnosis (otherwise, why waste the money to likely hear the same thing again?). Tons of biases here. My question is always: do journalists repeating this know the these things, which are pretty basic, and just don't care because it fills pages and gets clicks? If so, there is something evil about taking advantage of Average Joe's lack of statistical/logical knowledge to make money by making them come to the wrong conclusions. If not, wow journalists are dumb.
As usual, journalists and/. submitters knowingly or unknowingly use statistics and data to imply things they don't actually imply. Here, we are trying to suggest there is a high error rate in medical diagnoses. But the rate of different diagnosis given you seek a second opinion is not at all the same as the base rate of a different diagnosis if randomly selected individuals (or everyone) sought a second opinion. You seek a second opinion when you don't like the first opinion, or when it's so serious and you had some reason to doubt or you hope you have a reason to doubt. The second doctor likely knows this is a second opinion, either because you told him/her or because he/she can see it in your medical records. And you may have sought out a doctor you know will think differently. For a similar example, many chiropractors tell you to talk to them before back surgery. Not quite the same thing, but if you go there, you know what they are going to tell you in every case except when the X-ray shows it would be dangerous to perform chiropractic adjustments.
So what does this rate tell you? Not much. It certainly doesn't suggest the second opinion is correct. And it doesn't tell you much if anything about the base diagnosis error rate.
I have no idea what you're talking about. Almost every airline allows you to pay an extra $500 to ride in first class, and it's a much better experience. But most people are not willing to pay that, so first class seats are mostly filled by people getting upgraded in exchange for loyalty, which generally means paying an extra $50-100 per ticket to stick to one airline rather than picking the cheapest for your route. We have tons of options if you want to pay more for comfort, flexibility, and certainty. Airlines have like 20 fare classes where you can choose the rules you want to abide by. So whining about the rules and pretending you don't have full control over those rules by paying something more than the lowest available fare class is either your ignorance on how airlines work or just willful denial because you want to blame "that corporations!!!!" for only being able to fly anywhere you want for next to nothing using under whatever rules you desire. Ok...
And maybe first class isn't good enough for you. Maybe you want an even nicer experience where your short girlfriend is massaged in her seat. Well, there are only about a gazillion charter and private airlines in the US. For most people this isn't an option, because it turns out planes are expensive and operating them is expensive and maintaining them is expensive and landing fees at airports are expensive and security is expensive and paying commercial pilots is expensive and keeping them current on their type ratings, medicals, sim time, etc is expensive and complying with FAA regs is expensive and they end up in a totally different league cost wise compared to the highly efficient large commercial airlines.
So it's clear to me you have no idea what you're talking about and have onidea how good you have it and how amazing it is that $300 gets you anywhere in the US on a safe plane.
But I will give it one more shot. Suppose you get your own pilots license (to fly a small single engine plane). And you rent a Cessna and want to go somewhere, say, 500 mi away. Because it's you, you don't have to pay a pilot. You can leave from a regional GA airport, so no fees. You can even land at a regional GA airport, so likely no fees. All you're paying for is gas and plane rental. It will take you about 2-3x longer to get to your destination, plus 90 mins or so for preflight planning and inspection, but ignoring all that... you will still pay at least twice the cost for the round trip than if you bought a commercial airline ticket.
Perhaps that gives you some remote idea of how efficient commercial airlines are and how much you would need to pay to have the experience you are imagining......which, as I have said above, YOU CAN ALREADY DO TODAY.
You are having difficulty with this concept of tradeoff, aren't you? There is no free lunch. People don't want to pay significantly more to eliminate the 0.1% change they are voluntarily or involuntarily denied boarding. I bet you think Uber surge pricing isn't a consumer benefit, too.
Try spending a minute reading my comment for comprehension before drafting a long reply that misses my entire point. No, overbooking does not benefit the carrier compared to operating flights with the same profit margin (ie charging more to compensate). Overbooking benefits consumers. It's part of why you can spend $300 to fly anywhere in the US.
People claiming overbooking is an airline conspiracy to abuse its customers have no idea what they are talking about. These people are imagining a nonexistent magic unicorn scenario where the decision is whether to overbook at current prices or not overbook at the same prices. Like I said, silly.
This whole whine session is silly. I fly all the time. I see VDBs once every month or so. I try to get them if I can! Your loss is my gain, airline. I have seen an IDB once. Once. Airlines have stats on this. They have to report it to the FAA. IDBs are so rare and affect so few people, its just not something to even think about. And certainly not something you would want to pay more in every ticket to avoid. In fact, we know for sure the market doesn't want to do this, because airlines would love to remove overbooking and just charge everyone more. It would simplify operations and their systems and their risk. So why don't they do this? Their customers WANT THEM TO OVERBOOK.
So, you're saying a difference in outcome when sliced by a factor is not de facto evidence of discrimination based on that factor?
This has always been willful blindness. Many SJWs know plenty about stats and logical inferences, because you can cite similarly constructed scenarios that violate their preferred policy preferences (e.g. crime stats in high gun ownership areas, charter school outcomes, etc) and they will immediately explain to you that there are other factors at play and the difference in outcome doesn't say anything about the factor being causal. But because they like the implication that Victim Group 27 is being screwed over, they flip the situation me ask you to prove this isn't discrimination.
All the hoops Google is jumping through are designed by their HR legal team to avoid the liability arising from the fundamental logic error that difference in outcome is de facto evidence of discrimination unless you can prove otherwise. Nobody wants to have that burden of proof, so they design this HR gymnastics course so they have deniability. All it really does is prove the uselessness of the "evidence" in the first place.
I personally sympathize with these arguments, but what do they mean in an era where every "normal" person broadcasts typically private information and video documentation on twitbook and pinface and snapclone, and is streaming photos of their junk to iCloud seconds after taking them? Legal privacy has lost tons of ground in recent decades, but is still somehow so out of step with the cultural rejection of privacy that simply asserting the few remaining rights you have left makes you look like a tinfoil hat wearing loon.
At some point laws don't matter as much as culture. If everyone looks at you goofy when you want privacy (what do you have to hide?), any law is a temporary speed bump in the inevitable lurch toward no privacy.
I feel like we pretend a bill will change the culture. Zealous law enforcement agencies really are not the pace setter here.
I should be making at least $225,000 per year for my tech skills, but due to the abuses of H1-B visa systems by employers, I am scraping by on a pittance of $219,000. Why is this major issue of public policy not bubbling up to be a top priority?!
This is unconstitutional. Allow me to remind you of the federal government's enumerated powers per Article 1 Section 8:
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defense and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
To borrow on the credit of the United States;
To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;
To establish a uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;
To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;
To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;
To establish Post Offices and Post Roads;
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;
To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;
To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offenses against the Law of Nations;
To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;
To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;
To provide and maintain a Navy;
To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;
To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;
To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;
To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings; And
To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.
To establish vehicles by which all Persons obtain at least 5Mbps downstream and 1Mbps upstream to observe a reasonable number of cat videos regardless of income or personal wealth, and to provide for the general welfare of MMORPG environments, which require low latency connections to avoid death by a fucking orc shaman you didn't even was there because it aggro'd after your connection hiccuped because your damn sister is skyping her "boyfriend" in Italy, and isn't like 3am over there right now
Slashdot Mirror
I'm seeing a pattern with you. No, one does not need to look into methodology when a topic is unknowable. If the method is rigorous, then it is misapplied or the results don't actually show what TFS says it shows.
Did you read my reasearch paper showing how I create energy from nothing, or did you just assume I'm wrong?
You cannot know this was caused by man made factors of climate change.
It's fun and easy to mock these cases in hindsight. What a bubble! Fake company! No revenue! Etc. And, I'm with you in the mocking. But what gets lost is that before the crash, really smart people bet on this company. I'm not talking about investors. A friend left his home city and great director-level job to take a higher level position in a new city at this company. He is a smart guy. He was excited. He truly believed he was making the clearly right decision.
My point is that if all we do is laugh, we don't recognize that we could have been my friend. We should be learning from this, not mocking it as a stupidity we could never run into ourselves.
For the millionth time on record, entities abuse the language of science to make unscientific claims to push a political agenda. The good news is this story can serve as a self assessment. If you find it remotely plausible that through science we have found evidence of this so compelling to overcome alternative explanations beyond tolerable error, then you now know you do not understand science. Metaknowledge is difficult to obtain, so this really is a uniquely valuable opportunity.
Use a different airline. Every experience I have had in first class has been wonderful.
It's worse than that. The second doctor likely knows it's a second opinion. And you likely picked a doctor that might not give you the same diagnosis (otherwise, why waste the money to likely hear the same thing again?). Tons of biases here. My question is always: do journalists repeating this know the these things, which are pretty basic, and just don't care because it fills pages and gets clicks? If so, there is something evil about taking advantage of Average Joe's lack of statistical/logical knowledge to make money by making them come to the wrong conclusions. If not, wow journalists are dumb.
As usual, journalists and /. submitters knowingly or unknowingly use statistics and data to imply things they don't actually imply. Here, we are trying to suggest there is a high error rate in medical diagnoses. But the rate of different diagnosis given you seek a second opinion is not at all the same as the base rate of a different diagnosis if randomly selected individuals (or everyone) sought a second opinion. You seek a second opinion when you don't like the first opinion, or when it's so serious and you had some reason to doubt or you hope you have a reason to doubt. The second doctor likely knows this is a second opinion, either because you told him/her or because he/she can see it in your medical records. And you may have sought out a doctor you know will think differently. For a similar example, many chiropractors tell you to talk to them before back surgery. Not quite the same thing, but if you go there, you know what they are going to tell you in every case except when the X-ray shows it would be dangerous to perform chiropractic adjustments.
So what does this rate tell you? Not much. It certainly doesn't suggest the second opinion is correct. And it doesn't tell you much if anything about the base diagnosis error rate.
I have no idea what you're talking about. Almost every airline allows you to pay an extra $500 to ride in first class, and it's a much better experience. But most people are not willing to pay that, so first class seats are mostly filled by people getting upgraded in exchange for loyalty, which generally means paying an extra $50-100 per ticket to stick to one airline rather than picking the cheapest for your route. We have tons of options if you want to pay more for comfort, flexibility, and certainty. Airlines have like 20 fare classes where you can choose the rules you want to abide by. So whining about the rules and pretending you don't have full control over those rules by paying something more than the lowest available fare class is either your ignorance on how airlines work or just willful denial because you want to blame "that corporations!!!!" for only being able to fly anywhere you want for next to nothing using under whatever rules you desire. Ok...
And maybe first class isn't good enough for you. Maybe you want an even nicer experience where your short girlfriend is massaged in her seat. Well, there are only about a gazillion charter and private airlines in the US. For most people this isn't an option, because it turns out planes are expensive and operating them is expensive and maintaining them is expensive and landing fees at airports are expensive and security is expensive and paying commercial pilots is expensive and keeping them current on their type ratings, medicals, sim time, etc is expensive and complying with FAA regs is expensive and they end up in a totally different league cost wise compared to the highly efficient large commercial airlines.
So it's clear to me you have no idea what you're talking about and have onidea how good you have it and how amazing it is that $300 gets you anywhere in the US on a safe plane.
But I will give it one more shot. Suppose you get your own pilots license (to fly a small single engine plane). And you rent a Cessna and want to go somewhere, say, 500 mi away. Because it's you, you don't have to pay a pilot. You can leave from a regional GA airport, so no fees. You can even land at a regional GA airport, so likely no fees. All you're paying for is gas and plane rental. It will take you about 2-3x longer to get to your destination, plus 90 mins or so for preflight planning and inspection, but ignoring all that... you will still pay at least twice the cost for the round trip than if you bought a commercial airline ticket.
Perhaps that gives you some remote idea of how efficient commercial airlines are and how much you would need to pay to have the experience you are imagining... ...which, as I have said above, YOU CAN ALREADY DO TODAY.
This is more proof that our cities must build more bike lanes
Appreciate the back and forth but it's clear we aren't going to make any progress. Best wishes.
Charging what the market will bear? Please google an econ101 price v quantity profit optimization chart.
You are having difficulty with this concept of tradeoff, aren't you? There is no free lunch. People don't want to pay significantly more to eliminate the 0.1% change they are voluntarily or involuntarily denied boarding. I bet you think Uber surge pricing isn't a consumer benefit, too.
Here are the actual statistics. https://www.rita.dot.gov/bts/s...
Try spending a minute reading my comment for comprehension before drafting a long reply that misses my entire point. No, overbooking does not benefit the carrier compared to operating flights with the same profit margin (ie charging more to compensate). Overbooking benefits consumers. It's part of why you can spend $300 to fly anywhere in the US.
People claiming overbooking is an airline conspiracy to abuse its customers have no idea what they are talking about. These people are imagining a nonexistent magic unicorn scenario where the decision is whether to overbook at current prices or not overbook at the same prices. Like I said, silly.
This whole whine session is silly. I fly all the time. I see VDBs once every month or so. I try to get them if I can! Your loss is my gain, airline. I have seen an IDB once. Once. Airlines have stats on this. They have to report it to the FAA. IDBs are so rare and affect so few people, its just not something to even think about. And certainly not something you would want to pay more in every ticket to avoid. In fact, we know for sure the market doesn't want to do this, because airlines would love to remove overbooking and just charge everyone more. It would simplify operations and their systems and their risk. So why don't they do this? Their customers WANT THEM TO OVERBOOK.
So, you're saying a difference in outcome when sliced by a factor is not de facto evidence of discrimination based on that factor?
This has always been willful blindness. Many SJWs know plenty about stats and logical inferences, because you can cite similarly constructed scenarios that violate their preferred policy preferences (e.g. crime stats in high gun ownership areas, charter school outcomes, etc) and they will immediately explain to you that there are other factors at play and the difference in outcome doesn't say anything about the factor being causal. But because they like the implication that Victim Group 27 is being screwed over, they flip the situation me ask you to prove this isn't discrimination.
All the hoops Google is jumping through are designed by their HR legal team to avoid the liability arising from the fundamental logic error that difference in outcome is de facto evidence of discrimination unless you can prove otherwise. Nobody wants to have that burden of proof, so they design this HR gymnastics course so they have deniability. All it really does is prove the uselessness of the "evidence" in the first place.
I personally sympathize with these arguments, but what do they mean in an era where every "normal" person broadcasts typically private information and video documentation on twitbook and pinface and snapclone, and is streaming photos of their junk to iCloud seconds after taking them? Legal privacy has lost tons of ground in recent decades, but is still somehow so out of step with the cultural rejection of privacy that simply asserting the few remaining rights you have left makes you look like a tinfoil hat wearing loon.
At some point laws don't matter as much as culture. If everyone looks at you goofy when you want privacy (what do you have to hide?), any law is a temporary speed bump in the inevitable lurch toward no privacy.
I feel like we pretend a bill will change the culture. Zealous law enforcement agencies really are not the pace setter here.
I should be making at least $225,000 per year for my tech skills, but due to the abuses of H1-B visa systems by employers, I am scraping by on a pittance of $219,000. Why is this major issue of public policy not bubbling up to be a top priority?!
"this" refers to eliminating the handout and nobody read my comment
Is no one going to read my last paragraph?
Amen! In fact I have long mocked the founders for bothering to write the rest of the document.
You might RTFA, but you don't RTFC.
This is unconstitutional. Allow me to remind you of the federal government's enumerated powers per Article 1 Section 8:
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defense and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
To borrow on the credit of the United States;
To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;
To establish a uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;
To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;
To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;
To establish Post Offices and Post Roads;
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;
To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;
To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offenses against the Law of Nations;
To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;
To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;
To provide and maintain a Navy;
To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;
To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;
To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;
To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings; And
To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.
To establish vehicles by which all Persons obtain at least 5Mbps downstream and 1Mbps upstream to observe a reasonable number of cat videos regardless of income or personal wealth, and to provide for the general welfare of MMORPG environments, which require low latency connections to avoid death by a fucking orc shaman you didn't even was there because it aggro'd after your connection hiccuped because your damn sister is skyping her "boyfriend" in Italy, and isn't like 3am over there right now
Two types of climate change: man-made climate change and natural climate change. What % of the change in air currents is caused by each?
Ubuntu is the best distribution for all use cases and user knowledge levels. The addition of systemd really kicked things up even another notch.
You may begin...