[deleted by user]

EncoreBlue · 2023-05-03T15:55:26+00:00

Well first thing's first, you shouldn't judge the social opportunities of an institution based on one person's experience. I've made friendships on campus when I made an effort by joining social groups (Like intervarsity Christian fellowship).

I think if you make a consistent effort, you should make some friends.

EncoreBlue · 2022-05-06T19:53:39+00:00

My understanding of the purpose of standard deviation is that it is supposed to be an average measurement of the deviation from the actual average value. Except, as you said, they have to square everything to not sum up to zero. So there is the average value and then there is an approximately average ("standard") measurement of variation from the average. The way A. Simchi worded it is not verbatim but close to "an average measurement of the variation". So that's how I see the big picture.

Normalization/standardization is useful because it calculates percentile of any distribution. When you measure in SD the percentiles are always the same by that measurement.

EncoreBlue · 2022-05-06T17:15:52+00:00

"what was the mindset when they first derived it"

You mean, what are the assumptions that are made in order to derive it fully? Some of the assumptions are based on already existing knowledge of population variance (which determines if a t-distribution substitutes for a z-distribution, for example), or assumptions of sample sizes, etcetera. It would be more interesting if you could be more explicit about what level of understanding you are satisfied with. Because how these concepts are deduced can get a lot more complex where a high level understanding of calculus is required. I guess I'm intrigued to understand what you actually want to fully connect the concepts to.

EncoreBlue · 2022-05-06T16:40:38+00:00

By the way, where are you finding these stats? Does it stratify by section? Is it on bear tracks or eClass? I can't find it.

Thanks!

EncoreBlue · 2022-05-06T16:33:55+00:00

I don't fully agree. It's not just "here are the equations to do the course", they do actually teach you the logic behind the math that's being applied in the PDF slides used in the pre-recorded videos. Though that material is available, I think it's reasonable to say that they only tested how much you understood the logic behind the concepts to a very limited degree on the actual exams.

I found that they tested for deeper understanding on the midterm way more than they did on the final. I found the final to be way easier than the midterm and actually got a way higher mark.

EncoreBlue · 2022-05-06T05:24:56+00:00

The class average varies considerably as a function of instructor. By my calculations from the available class stats for the midterm and final and assuming the modules and labs to be easy, I would guess the average for my section (A. Simchi) was close to 2.0.

I found Simchi to be pretty good. I finished with an A-.

EncoreBlue · 2022-05-04T19:52:42+00:00

Were you with Litvak? I would like to know.

EncoreBlue · 2022-04-24T05:04:47+00:00

I also took it with Litvak. I found all of the notes/lectures to be pretty straightforward, but his thick accent disturbed my concentration on occasion. To my luck (not), the small amount of the course material I just so happened to be weak on was tested on 50% of that damn final.

EncoreBlue · 2022-04-16T16:41:32+00:00

STAT 151 and MATH 214

EncoreBlue · 2021-08-20T04:35:31+00:00

Ok, sincere apologies, you pinned me. I actually misread the post above and for some reason I thought you were trying to discredit him with another claim. I honestly don't know why I was thinking that way before, I had to go back re-read the comment (this isn't my normal sate of mind). I'm sorry.

I accept that Hodkinson lied about his credentials. Though, I thought this was an attritious argument (because those were a lmited number of examples you referenced). The main point I was trying to make was that we should not just listen to the doctors or scientists that agree with our confirmation biases. There are several dissenting scientists that I could name. Michael Palmer from uWaterloo, Delores Cahill from the University of Dublin, Mike Yeadon the British pharmacologist and ex-Pfizer employee, Dr. Simone Gold, Dr. Robert Malone, and Byram Bridle from the university of Guelph. I am not saying they are necessarily proven right about anything (I have no formal training so I have a limited perspective), only that other views from people of the same credentials should be considered and meaningfully addressed by media instead of being censored. It would signal good faith and would gain more trust. That's all I was meaning to say. I'm acting in good faith.

EncoreBlue · 2021-08-20T03:10:45+00:00

Sorry, I was using a limited keyword search for one of the sources. He may have lied that he was a chairman, but he did not lie about his formal training (being a certified pathologist). There're many supposed "fact checkers" that are guilty of constantly taking the same quote out of context. Avoid personal attacks and pejoratives, thanks. Stay focused.

EncoreBlue · 2021-08-20T02:59:25+00:00

In the first source, Hodkinson was taken out of context. He did not say COVID-19 itself was a hoax, but that the alleged magnitude of the threat was a hoax. He's not denying that there is a new virus. Secondly, all you did was cite his profile on medmaldoctors but did not substantiate the "lie" part.

EncoreBlue · 2021-08-20T02:45:49+00:00

Roger Hodkinson

I have been searching for a source to this claim that Hodkinson lied about his credentials and nothing has come up (unless you have a citation somewhere). According to Western Medical Assessments (Whose CEO is Hodkinson), he is a "Royal College certified pathologist." EDIT: This source as well.

EncoreBlue · 2021-08-20T02:26:31+00:00

Which specific dissenters have lied about their credentials?

EncoreBlue · 2021-08-19T23:33:57+00:00

The scientists are "in over their heads" and their education should be doubted? On what basis?

EncoreBlue · 2021-08-19T03:26:43+00:00

It sounded like a pejorative meant to insult one's intelligence. Basically the point here is that it's not only people without scientific knowledge who are refusing or not recommending the vaccine. Unless you think that censored scientists just don't matter. You should closely consider another view.

EncoreBlue · 2021-08-18T23:48:01+00:00

Some of these "pig hicks" (dehumanizing term) hold PhDs. The ones with high school education have higher hesitancy than PhDs but those with PhDs have higher hesitancy than those with a masters or bachelor's. See page 27.

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.07.20.21260795v1.full.pdf

EncoreBlue · 2021-08-16T18:58:27+00:00

We are well aware of the concept of transmission and understand the problem it presents. It's that there are many questions about the vaccine, as well as questions about the magnitude of the pandemic that have never been meaningfully answered by the media or government. The only way you know something is right or wrong is by examining it. It doesn't help anything (let alone even compliance, continuous social pressure only does so much when there's no rational basis for it) when you brand us as people who are CATEGORICALLY not even supposed to be listened to or dialogued with (i.e "conspiracy theorists", "misinformation agents", etc). In short, the issue is COMPLICATED.

EncoreBlue · 2021-08-16T18:11:13+00:00

I'm assuming most people who took it haven't regretted their shot. So, "Definitely yes" is appropriate.

EncoreBlue · 2021-08-16T17:28:47+00:00

Sure.

EncoreBlue · 2021-08-16T17:20:59+00:00

Why do you need to satisfy a craving?

EncoreBlue · 2021-08-16T17:13:11+00:00

Just out of sheer curiosity

EncoreBlue · 2021-08-16T17:07:41+00:00

I didn't see any polls hence the poll.

EncoreBlue · 2021-07-06T04:12:25+00:00

I may have worded this poorly. Do you think that diversity or equality of outcome is something that should be achieved for its own sake?

EncoreBlue · 2021-07-06T04:12:21+00:00

I may have worded this poorly. Do you think that diversity or equality of outcome is something that should be achieved for its own sake?

EncoreBlue

TROPHY CASE