If you're trying to have a pissing contest to prove you know how to spoof the system and create bad data - congratulations - you win.
But with over 8 million "hits", and statistician will tell you that the data is statistically significant within some margin of error. Any researcher worth their weight will take bad data and outliers into consideration.
The overwhelming majority (easily > 99%) of the hits are valid. Most people (i.e. general public, not slashdotters or technical people) - who use my website don't know an IP address from a street address, and don't know cookies from brownies. I know my demographics very, very well - I know the types of people that participate on the site - YOU DO NOT. For instance, do you know how many times I've gotten an email from a user with the question "Where's the zip code on the dollar bill?" or sign on as "idioutuser@alo.com" or "hotmial.com" ?? ALOT OF THEM. We're not dealing with technical people, I'm usually dealing with people who can barely figure out how to log on and send email.
The very few people who do attempt to spoof the system are *usually* detected. I've gotten very good at the detecting the patterns of abuse after doing this for eight years. Do some slip bogus entries through - sure they do.. and that's why anyone using this dataset would take that into consideration.
First, only the FRB can judge if a bill is unfit to be re-issued. You can't, a bank can't, a merchant can't.
Second, the website simply tracks bills by serial number, and works if bills are marked or not. The site does not encourage or endorse the defacement of currency. I am forbidden by law to sell rubber stamps that do so. What the users do and purchase on their own accord is between them and their lawyer.
So did the researchers who used your data set take this into account?
For that matter, did you have a significant role in the study beyond providing the data set?
I did not take part in the study, I only provided the data. The data removed from the data set are entries that are obviously fake - for instance two entries thousands of miles apart, entered from the same machine. Or people who intentionally snail-mail bills to each other.
I spend a significant amount of time EVERY DAY to ferret out fake data. I have several automated processes that search for and remove any data that does not fit certain criteria. I take this site, and the data integrity very seriously, so I take personal offense to your offhand, unfounded, and ignorant comments.
Slashdot Mirror
If you're trying to have a pissing contest to prove you know how to spoof the system and create bad data - congratulations - you win.
But with over 8 million "hits", and statistician will tell you that the data is statistically significant within some margin of error. Any researcher worth their weight will take bad data and outliers into consideration.
The overwhelming majority (easily > 99%) of the hits are valid. Most people (i.e. general public, not slashdotters or technical people) - who use my website don't know an IP address from a street address, and don't know cookies from brownies. I know my demographics very, very well - I know the types of people that participate on the site - YOU DO NOT. For instance, do you know how many times I've gotten an email from a user with the question "Where's the zip code on the dollar bill?" or sign on as "idioutuser@alo.com" or "hotmial.com" ?? ALOT OF THEM. We're not dealing with technical people, I'm usually dealing with people who can barely figure out how to log on and send email.
The very few people who do attempt to spoof the system are *usually* detected. I've gotten very good at the detecting the patterns of abuse after doing this for eight years. Do some slip bogus entries through - sure they do.. and that's why anyone using this dataset would take that into consideration.
Those bills have been deleted and blocked from entry on the site, as will any others you post here.
As I said, I take data integrity very seriously, and tricks and games like this will not be tolerated.
-Hank
As I said in my previous post, nothing on the site endorses nor encourages defacing currency. But I guess you didn't actually read what I wrote.
First, only the FRB can judge if a bill is unfit to be re-issued. You can't, a bank can't, a merchant can't. Second, the website simply tracks bills by serial number, and works if bills are marked or not. The site does not encourage or endorse the defacement of currency. I am forbidden by law to sell rubber stamps that do so. What the users do and purchase on their own accord is between them and their lawyer.
So did the researchers who used your data set take this into account? For that matter, did you have a significant role in the study beyond providing the data set?
I did not take part in the study, I only provided the data. The data removed from the data set are entries that are obviously fake - for instance two entries thousands of miles apart, entered from the same machine. Or people who intentionally snail-mail bills to each other.
I spend a significant amount of time EVERY DAY to ferret out fake data. I have several automated processes that search for and remove any data that does not fit certain criteria. I take this site, and the data integrity very seriously, so I take personal offense to your offhand, unfounded, and ignorant comments.
-Hank
But if you go to the wrong URL, it will be corrected automatically.
And it was only temporarily down.. it's back up now.
The is no "business model". The site DOES NOT SELL RUBBER STAMPS. It stopped selling rubber stamps in 2000 at the request of the U.S. Secret Service.
It's also not "these guys"... it's "this guy".
Please stop spreading this disinformation.