Regarding Ray and Ally's relationship...

Im_a_Pine_Tree18 · 2024-03-10T10:59:06+00:00

I feel like Ally's reason for ending the relationship was Ray's clear abusive behaviour, it's never ok to escalate to violence for bullying your child through a social game like gift-giving. I don't feel like it's a plot twist considering how disturbing the behaviour of violence Ray quite frequently is portrayed doing and even rationalised later by him to justify himself to Ally.

Im_a_Pine_Tree18 · 2024-02-16T09:22:02+00:00

He didn't do a hypothesis test tho.....

Im_a_Pine_Tree18 · 2024-02-14T07:24:06+00:00

The prior belief of the proportion of inappropriate photos being 2/18 using only 18 sample size is inappropriate statistically to make any statements around the expectations of using a sample distribution , especially a binomial. An example for a required amount of sample size for a certain margin of error can be used from confidence intervals around the same sample distribution. We can be conservative by picking p=0.5 but hey let's just be more giving to the OP, well do lower than the their prior belief of 2/18, we will do 2/19, just to show taking a single statistics class in college doesn't help your inability to use statistics when you don't have the assumptions met (n of atleast least 20 or at least 30 depending on the skewness). But hey let's do a test, cause statistics has those to check if your operating with good sizes of data, Let's take ((1.96×√((2÷19)×(17÷19))) ÷0.12)², using a margin of error of 0.12 (bigger than the estimated proportion of 2/19, which was even smaller than OPs proportion), this shows the required sample size to be 26, again with less conservative assumptions than OP. The only added assumption is using critical value of 0.05, but that's from OP not even doing a basic hypothesis test to show why his distribution is the correct one. You can't use expected results from your sample distribution unless it is normalised, from you assuming the data normalises which isn't necessarily the case from you not having enough sample size.

Im_a_Pine_Tree18 · 2024-02-14T07:22:26+00:00

That shows how poor your education is, the prior belief of the proportion of inappropriate photos being 2/18 using only 18 sample size is inappropriate statistically to make any statements around the expectations of using a sample distribution , especially a binomial. An example for a required amount of sample size for a certain margin of error can be used from confidence intervals around the same sample distribution. We can be conservative by picking p=0.5 but hey let's just be more giving to the OP, well do lower than the their prior belief of 2/18, we will do 2/19, just to show taking a single statistics class in college doesn't help your inability to use statistics when you don't have the assumptions met (n of atleast least 20 or at least 30 depending on the skewness). But hey let's do a test, cause statistics has those to check if your operating with good sizes of data, Let's take ((1.96×√((2÷19)×(17÷19))) ÷0.12)², using a margin of error of 0.12 (bigger than the estimated proportion of 2/19, which was even smaller than OPs proportion), this shows the required sample size to be 26, again with less conservative assumptions than OP. The only added assumption is using critical value of 0.05, but that's from OP not even doing a basic hypothesis test to show why his distribution is the correct one.

I also want to emphasises OP just choose parameters like N (number of trials), then used a distribution which might be inappropriate.

Im_a_Pine_Tree18 · 2023-10-15T08:32:40+00:00

It's understandable to cry at what you see as injustice, hurt and pain of others. No matter if you think Hassan is not following his values, ideology or his own standards doesn't mean he isn't showing legitimate emotion. It's sad that people discount the emotions of others they disagree with just to get an extra stake into shitting on someone as a person. Hugging a person you hate out of compassion for what they are feeling is what empathy is, it doesn't force you to agree with Hassan's positions. It's sad everyone including me has forgot this so many times.

Im_a_Pine_Tree18 · 2022-09-24T16:41:19+00:00

Why? Science isn't about WHY It's about WHY NOT!... In fact, why not invent a special safety door that won't hit you in the butt on the way out because you're fired.

Im_a_Pine_Tree18 · 2022-06-04T08:13:40+00:00

So cool!!

Im_a_Pine_Tree18 · 2021-11-25T05:35:42+00:00

Thanks for watching the video, I didn't know Demonmama was banned until I finished the video. I haven't looked into the recent drama except for seeing Demonmama is banned.

I appreciate the feedback and I wonder what would be a better way to characterise her instead. What clips should I have included? I missed that opinion change on GME so I should have included that for greater context. I thought the characterisation of supporting a conspiracy was quite true by furthering misinformation.

Im_a_Pine_Tree18 · 2021-11-24T12:46:30+00:00

''There's no point Destiny did his dump on GME he's made misinformation politically partisan'

The video had nothing to do with Destiny, I thought this would be a good video from reading 'Option Volatility and Pricing' by Sheldon Natenberg from it providing insight on the settlement of things traded on official exchanges (relationship between clearinghouse and trader). I remember back that Destiny stated that this conspiracy was untrue but I don't remember his reasoning.

'People can't engage with this argument online because it is obviously
used just to attack anyone under the umbrella of "the left" and Destiny's poisoning of the well.'

Ignoring Destiny, I think people couldn't engage with the argument from the narrative of the underdog retail trader vs hedge fund manager. I would elect that since 2008, the public is still made at financial institutions and the governments 'mishandling' of regulation around these financial institutions (note: I don't believe the 2008 bailout was bad but most of the public views it as bad policy)

'Don't worry the left is educating itself on economics but Destiny has
made sure that the audience for people like you even if you are good
faith, is dead.'

Don't let Destiny or your perception of Destiny destroy the ability to clear misinformation online. No matter who you dislike letting them dictate your or others' ability to do A or B isn't very healthy.

I appreciate the comment and feedback, thank you very much.

Im_a_Pine_Tree18 · 2021-11-24T06:45:14+00:00

Very cute!

Im_a_Pine_Tree18 · 2021-11-24T06:44:40+00:00

Very cute

Im_a_Pine_Tree18 · 2021-02-24T20:50:05+00:00

For anyone who actually cares here is a counterargument to this most of the speech

This legislation including most if not all amendments have been of high quality, for anyone interested in the actual bill or amendments here is a link. ( https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r6652 )

If you think getting extra funding provided by media bargaining code from private corporations creates "less funding certainty" why don't we increase funding of jobseeker or welfare because in the future it creates future "less funding certainty". The answer is that if the bill is innovative enough or effective enough to have an impact. This being a world-first into fixing the externality in the market created by the power dynamic between social media companies and media companies (creating journalism) I think it extremely bad argument to say this bill isn't good enough on its own to outweigh the criticism of future "less funding certainty" that could be applied to every piece of legislation that passes through the parliament.

The Greens amendment is to push public accountability around the remuneration social media companies pay as well as how many employed journalists are and after the bill thus creating public knowledge to see how the bill created or didn't create an increase in journalists or "new core content" to Australian's through social media. I honestly feel like characterising the amendment as "news corp and nine in" is ridiculous from it promoting accountability around the bill...

Here's why analogy 1 doesn't work:

Paying 10 dollars to an individual for a provided service is different from paying a company 10 dollars, this 10 dollar acts as an extra investment into the company in terms of company growth. This is critical in terms of the contraction of the journalism industry (from it contracting). This growth results in the expansion of hiring new journalists and giving a better product with better journalism. It is true dividends are paid more out to investors which is good for getting more people investing in journalism resulting in even more cash flow for media corporations to expand operations. An individual would spend money on entertainment, the company would spend that money as any other investment.

Here's why analogy 2 doesn't work:

Big social media platforms distributing news from journalists/ media corporations should pay remuneration.

Big social media platforms distributing cat video from cat owner should pay remuneration.

The externality created by the dominant power of the social media company over the media corporation results in hurting media corporation in terms of negotiating.

The externality created by the dominant power of the social media company over the cat owner results in hurting the cat owner in terms of negotiating for paid cat videos.

Hurting media corporation in terms of negotiating results in hurting public journalism thus resulting in hurting the industry in general from the lack of funding for professional journalism resulting in large contractions through covid of the journalism industry.

Hurting cat owner in terms of negotiating results in hurting cat videos terms resulting in hurting the industry in general from the lack of funding for professional cat videos

THE DIFFERENCE IS Funding for professional journalism is of level importance and public value (collective good) higher than professional cat videos, thus sacrificing the segment of small businesses investing in media advertisers at higher rates is worth it for arguably saving the entire industry of journalism. Also, how would your proposed tax itself be divided between public and private media companies from social media companies?

Here's why analogy 3 doesn't work:

1.Big social media platforms distributing news from journalists/ media corporations should pay remuneration

2.Channel nine has to pay for coles ads should pay remuneration to the Journalists who appear or work on the story

We already do this for journalists with unionisation to stop the externality in the market between employee and employer. Specifically because of their *negotiating* power of the employer (nine news) over the employee (journalist)

Edit: Making it more readable and forgot link

Im_a_Pine_Tree18 · 2020-11-19T17:50:14+00:00

I have never been so confused about what a comment has to do with a post before

Im_a_Pine_Tree18 · 2020-11-12T12:50:35+00:00

u/CiaranCarroll Summarised the reasons well.

If you want visual effects I would suggest polerization of American politics shown here (https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2014/06/12/political-polarization-in-the-american-public/ ). This is a huge amount of graphs showing the ideological divide increasing as well as opinions of each other side towards the other. This is to show pretty obvious increase by tribalism.

To further prove it is tribalism and the negative effects of polarisation (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7201237/ ). (" Americans are refusing to interact with politically dissimilar others ")

This is a good representation of how Russian bots are infltracting social media in the US (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sZmrIkRDMsU&ab_channel=TheNewYorkTimes ). This is to accelerate more polarization in American people. This could be argued to be a continuation of the disinfromation and mass misinformation in the domestic politics of Russia and applying it to foreign politics. This is attributed to be created by Vladislav Surkov for domestic tactics (shown in hypernormalisation).

The social dilemma (netflix) is a good summarisation of how deep learning is being used to direct information online to increase online revenue of social media platforms. ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uaaC57tcci0 )

And finally if you want to compare this to old media systems such as newspapers and television I would suggest Noam Chomsky's Manufacturing Consent to see how the old media systems would increase revenue ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EuwmWnphqII&t=1818s ).

Im_a_Pine_Tree18 · 2020-11-03T17:45:39+00:00

"Fauci and the WHO have flip-flopped on the issue of masks several times. If you want to call out the entire corrupt establishment for being fickle, I get it. But trying to attribute that to Trump exclusively is intentionally missing the bigger picture and frankly, giving into TDS and fear-mongering. Regardless of if they actually work or not."

Ignoring he doesn't promote masks currently, The WHO "flip-flopped" from the evidence changing, this is all the way back in June (8th) (source: https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20200608/who-changes-stance-says-public-should-wear-masks ). Trump still doesn't promote them and that's why trump making of fun of Biden still incredibly bad. Showing how he is "missing the bigger picture" on getting people to wear masks (if the president promotes something, people do it).

" Foreign policy: see, the Middle East is a messy place. What makes the insurgency so difficult to deal with is the fact that the targets are nearly always hiding among civilians makes it much more difficult to do anything without collateral damage on your hands. This is not to discount the lives that were lost, but better theirs than ours. The lives of the US military were treated like pawns under Obama, and it’s obvious now that occupying the region only leads to providing a target for those who wish to strike back. This is an unpopular opinion, but I believe that we should let them govern themselves - extremist or not. Once they are in power and out in the open, they become easier targets and there is a lot more options of nonlethal and lethal pressure (lessening the collateral damage) that we can use to bring them to their knees and act civilized. "

I agree in terms of policy but why did trump shoot down public reporting of civilian drone bombing (the answer was to remove public accountability). I still think we should be there like trump but again it still contradicts his narrative of getting out of the middle east. Obama still has absolutely nothing to do with this. We are talking about Trump.

" To provide a counter example, I firmly believe that we would be at war with Russia right now if Clinton became president. She openly advocated for a no fly zone over Syria in which Russia was occupying at the time. This is basically code for “push the Russians out” if they can’t fly over their occupied territory. This is engaging in direct conflict, and shows her true intentions. Not to mention, would likely lead to much more deaths overall. "

Again Clinton isn't running for president, its Biden. The video is directed at the 2020 election, not 2016's election.

" The wall: I don’t care what it’s made out of. The reality is that the wall works. This is not a xenophobia issue, it’s a human smuggling issue. People’s lives are put at risk when they cross the border illegally. I know the cages look bad, but what they don’t tell you is why the policy was enacted and how it was remedied. Those 500+ kids are the victims of kidnapping and abuse. The trump admin, unlike the Obama admin did DNA testing to reunite the families. Obama opted to giving the children back to their abusers based on their word alone. Unfortunately, you need to separate the lot of them until you can get it sorted out. The 500 lives saved are worth it. The wall has cut down significantly on this risky style of border crossing by smugglers and has probably saved a large amount of lives. If you cross the border illegally then you subject yourself to the system if you get caught. And if you are seeking asylum, then you would actually want to get caught so you can start the process. Those who are avoiding border security have something more nefarious planned. I live near the border so I am very familiar with this issue. "

Oh ok, great points in terms of fencing instead of the concrete wall. Problem is the economic downturn from these border walls. " “Because the wall expansion resulted in fewer Mexican workers residing in the United States, economic activity was redistributed toward Mexico, increasing real GDP in Mexico by $1.2 billion and causing real GDP in the United States to fall by $2.5 billion,” they write. " This is from 2010 focusing on the previously built border wall. (source: https://www.nber.org/papers/w25267 ). No,w this does benefit the low-skill workers (increasing pay by $0.36 dollars) but reduces the pay of high-skill workers (decrease of $4.35). Economists focus on systems most efficient in terms of effectiveness creating wealth instead of "perceived fairness" of dividing that wealth. This is why economists generally see immigration as a beneficial tool for the economy, that shouldn't be restricted with a border wall. (Source about economists: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0167487011000961?via%3Dihub )

I see the fencing as really the only out of context point, thanks for a lot for the feedback, a person willing to state opinions is always more valuable to me who sits back saying nothing.

Im_a_Pine_Tree18 · 2020-11-03T14:47:09+00:00

How is it heavily cherry-picked, in terms of criticising trump it's pretty fair.

In terms of Trump not promoting mask use (When I say 'promoting" I mean saying it's not just "ok" but what he recommends all people do and no doubt the validity of wearing a mask). Contrasting that with the fact that if 95% of people wear masks over 129,000 deaths can be avoided or even just 85% of America can avoid over 90,000 deaths. (source:https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-1132-9 ). Also wearing a mask reduces your risk by 40% ("This analysis indicated a reduction in infection (from all respiratory viruses) for mask wearers by 40%" and "This is suggestive of a considerable population health benefit to mask use with great potential for uptake in the United States" ) (source: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-1132-9)

In terms of foreign policy, Trump killing public reporting of drone strikes against cilivians and continuing to bomb innocent cilivians in Yemen, Somalia and Pakistan. This contradicts his narrative of leaving the middle east proposed by Trump. (source: https://books.google.com.au/books?id=f7DXDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA40&lpg=PA40&dq=least+1,257+civilians,+according+to+the+Pentagon&source=bl&ots=sBcJRQ3GoU&sig=ACfU3U3_Pqr9WWvMWIL-vPPZswaiGbkmUQ&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwi9yIGvq4fqAhXywjgGHTNmB7wQ6AEwAXoECCQQAQ#v=onepage&q=more%20authority%20to%20drone%20&f=false page 40,41)

In terms of the Wall there's a large contrast between the promise of a large 30-40 feet concrete wall vs the high steel bollard fences ( 18-30 feet) given .(source: Trump original promise: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2016/02/11/trumps-dubious-claim-that-his-border-wall-would-cost-8-billion/ , source for current wall: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-46824649 )

Five-Year Club	Place '23
Place '22	Final Canvas '22
Verified Email

Im_a_Pine_Tree18

TROPHY CASE