So, we should ban guns because poor people can't afford them?
Of course not. I don't believe in banning guns.
My argument is that you cannot make a deduction about safety, based on a statistic that people who own guns have longer life expectancy (within a margin of error, by the way) than people who do not. There are just too many other variables that would have greater impact.
You see, though, I can unclog my drains and take care to keep the drain cleaner in a secured cabinet. I don't have to throw up my hands in dismay and just accept that I have to live with a clogged drain I can't clear.
Drain cleaner is the worst way to clear a clogged drain. If you have drain cleaner in your house, then you have already thrown up your hands.
The right statistic is this: if you own guns, will your (and your family's) average lifespan be longer or shorter?
If you own guns, it means that you can afford guns, which means that you have money. As someone who does "statistics for my day job", you sure don't seem to have a grasp of how to use statistics.
People with money live longer.
You would also find that people who drive Mercedes Benz automobiles have longer lifespans than those who don't.
The only statistic that matters is this: If you own a gun, are you and your family more or less likely to die by a gun? The answer to that one is known. Here's another: If you own a gun, is your toddler more or less likely to be killed in a gun accident? Also, If you own a gun, are you more or less likely to kill yourself?
You might ask yourself this, "Then why, Weev, why?" Well, I can tell you the answer to that... The answer is, "For the lulz."
For the lulz? Here is a one-hour interview with Weev on a well-known White Supremacist podcast. There are no lulz to be had, but a good deal of racism, discussion of "White Genocide" and promoting "noble European values".
Weev was one of the early proponents and e-celebs in the now-defunct #gamergate movement. He wrote, "Gamergate is the biggest siren bringing people into the folds of white nationalism." You can look it up yourself, if you don't believe me.
Here is an admiring profile on him written by a guy that runs the biggest White Supremacist podcast in Europe:
Comcast, Time Warner, and AT&T are having a contest
1. Who can be the biggest dick to their customer. 2. Who can screw over local governments the most. 3. Who can screw over State governments the most. 4. Grand Prize, screw over the Federal Government and ALL taxpayers.
The entire Fortune 500 is also involved in this contest.
I imagine it will be very popular. I also imagine it will be very popular with younger people.
God, I hope so. I'm counting on spending a good deal of my time sitting on my front step with a cocktail and watching twenty-somethings with VR headsets walking into traffic and stuff.
I'm curious, am I supposed to adopt VR before or after the Internet of Things? I don't want to get them out of order, you know? I'm pretty sure self-driving cars come after those two, and the gig economy comes first, but I keep mixing up the two in the middle.
According to Nate Silver's site, congressional endorsements are a better predictor of who will win the primary elections than polling data.
Don't conflate prediction with perfect correlation. One is a numerical analysis with built-in error. The other is simply a representation of data. And the data shows a perfect correlation between the number of racist Google searches in a region and the level of support for Donald Trump.
That's a pretty strange slander-lation you got there. I went with a translation instead and found:
Not only was his translation slanderous (I found the exact quote from a white supremacist web site), but the the section of the Koran he quotes is from a section that deals with a code of behavior for waging war when war is being waged against you.
"So no matter how bad you think Trump might be for the economy, the more-of-the-same alternative is probably a pathway to crushing debts and financial doom...Trump, on the other hand, is an unpredictable future event that can change just about anything"
Note the confluence of "probably", "unpredictable" and "can change just about anything".
Think about ceilings and floors. Give it a little time, it will come to you.
According to statistician Nate Silver's site, the strongest predictor of the amount of support for Donald Trump in a given region is the number of Google searches for racist content. No other demographic indicator even comes close.
Slashdot Mirror
Because they may both go bankrupt?
What does that say about Donald Trump?
Of course not. I don't believe in banning guns.
My argument is that you cannot make a deduction about safety, based on a statistic that people who own guns have longer life expectancy (within a margin of error, by the way) than people who do not. There are just too many other variables that would have greater impact.
Drain cleaner is the worst way to clear a clogged drain. If you have drain cleaner in your house, then you have already thrown up your hands.
How long before we read the story of the Florida man who tried to take a selfie of his dick and ended up blowing his nuts off?
If you own guns, it means that you can afford guns, which means that you have money. As someone who does "statistics for my day job", you sure don't seem to have a grasp of how to use statistics.
People with money live longer.
You would also find that people who drive Mercedes Benz automobiles have longer lifespans than those who don't.
The only statistic that matters is this: If you own a gun, are you and your family more or less likely to die by a gun? The answer to that one is known. Here's another: If you own a gun, is your toddler more or less likely to be killed in a gun accident? Also, If you own a gun, are you more or less likely to kill yourself?
You might have that backwards.
You might want to talk to these guys:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
I'm here because they said something about an open bar.
Sure and Jesus very well may come back, and soon. But that's not exactly a strategy, is it?
For the lulz? Here is a one-hour interview with Weev on a well-known White Supremacist podcast. There are no lulz to be had, but a good deal of racism, discussion of "White Genocide" and promoting "noble European values".
http://www.redicecreations.com...
Promoting racism "for the lulz" and doing it at a scale like Weev does is an interesting way to get one's entertainment, you have to admit.
Well, it is and it's not.
Weev was one of the early proponents and e-celebs in the now-defunct #gamergate movement. He wrote, "Gamergate is the biggest siren bringing people into the folds of white nationalism." You can look it up yourself, if you don't believe me.
Here is an admiring profile on him written by a guy that runs the biggest White Supremacist podcast in Europe:
https://plus.google.com/+Henri...
"Valet"? Is that what you're calling him now?
The entire Fortune 500 is also involved in this contest.
Relaxed and repealed gun laws and increased conceal/carry have also not led to a reduction in crime.
http://www.wsaz.com/content/ne...
God, I hope so. I'm counting on spending a good deal of my time sitting on my front step with a cocktail and watching twenty-somethings with VR headsets walking into traffic and stuff.
I'm curious, am I supposed to adopt VR before or after the Internet of Things? I don't want to get them out of order, you know? I'm pretty sure self-driving cars come after those two, and the gig economy comes first, but I keep mixing up the two in the middle.
This is the ringtone I use for my first wife:
https://youtu.be/35rHHEiNaIM
Don't conflate prediction with perfect correlation. One is a numerical analysis with built-in error. The other is simply a representation of data. And the data shows a perfect correlation between the number of racist Google searches in a region and the level of support for Donald Trump.
The link was to a story that has nothing whatsoever to do with Trump.
Not only was his translation slanderous (I found the exact quote from a white supremacist web site), but the the section of the Koran he quotes is from a section that deals with a code of behavior for waging war when war is being waged against you.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01...
Then let me help you:
Note the confluence of "probably", "unpredictable" and "can change just about anything".
Think about ceilings and floors. Give it a little time, it will come to you.
According to statistician Nate Silver's site, the strongest predictor of the amount of support for Donald Trump in a given region is the number of Google searches for racist content. No other demographic indicator even comes close.
Can anyone spot the logical fallacy in the above quoted post from Scott Adams?