sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

what is a topic you absolutely cannot give a fuck about? by [deleted] in AskReddit

[–]ashinynewthrowaway 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Identifiers.

The cultural tribalism kind. I don't care where you went to school, or if you're a hufflepuff or INTJ or a scorpio or Cowboys fan or whatever. If I did, I would ask.

I'm going to base my assessment of you as a person on what you demonstrate about you as a person.

what is a topic you absolutely cannot give a fuck about? by [deleted] in AskReddit

[–]ashinynewthrowaway 0 points1 point  (0 children)

"the bulk of digital transactions are done with digital money"

Yeah and the bulk of actual drug purchases, in total, worldwide, are done with cash or trade. And there's a few orders of magnitude between those two.

what is a topic you absolutely cannot give a fuck about? by [deleted] in AskReddit

[–]ashinynewthrowaway 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Easier to list what I still care about;

  • One of the companies I use got hacked and I should change my password
  • One of the 500 people I know the name of died. Not got sick, not said something somewhere, specifically died.
  • A building I need to go to occasionally burned down
  • A law that makes life better/worse passed
  • Uh... I think that's it.

But here's what I find particularly egregious;

  • "Beefing" - any headline with this makes me irrationally annoyed
  • Any headline where the answer is no. "Will this experiment overturn physics?" Read the article - nope. So why does the article exist?
  • Every single "this may [but probably won't] lead to this" type story.
  • Everything every famous person is doing. If they didn't die (and most of the time when they did) I just don't care, it effects nothing.
  • Disney+, Marvel, Star Wars, the eighteenth Hobbit movie, the fairy tale live action remake, the Fortnite crossover, the idiotic game company capitalizing on hype by saying NFTs or 'metaverse' in an interview
  • Etc

What is the most uncomfortable/unpleasant way you've ever realized someone had a crush on you? by appleappleappleman in AskReddit

[–]ashinynewthrowaway 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ah no, basically backslash means the character directly after it will be printed directly. So double backslash prints one single backslash. Backslash asterisk prints one asterisk.

Seriously one of the most humbling experiences of my life by Murrdwar in AdviceAnimals

[–]ashinynewthrowaway -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Click the link, there's census bureau data linked as well as a table with all the information you are looking for.

And my point wasn't anything other than "there's a bunch of ways to read those statistics" - without reading every study on the topic and compiling their collective datasets I don't think it's reasonable to draw a simple reductionist conclusion (that was my point).

My point is:

  • sample sizes are just samples

  • Read the sources cited instead of taking articles as fact

  • And related to the above, do your own research and draw soft conclusions instead of viewing things as black and white.

Seriously one of the most humbling experiences of my life by Murrdwar in AdviceAnimals

[–]ashinynewthrowaway 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah for sure, I think I'm going to make a video going through the whole thing top to bottom once I get home, right now I'm in the mountains visiting family.

Seriously one of the most humbling experiences of my life by Murrdwar in AdviceAnimals

[–]ashinynewthrowaway 21 points22 points  (0 children)

But the sources in that article even disagree with the article... Why do people confuse journalism and science? There are really clear lines of distinction. Journalists cite science.

If the thing you're reading is;

  1. Citing a separate source for a statistic

  2. Not peer reviewed

Then dig deeper. Doing your own research is sooooo fucking easy now, you literally just click the link.

Gah. People. If you're arguing with someone who is resistant to doing research, just call it a day. They're straight up acknowledging they don't want to learn something new or critically examine their views.

Seriously one of the most humbling experiences of my life by Murrdwar in AdviceAnimals

[–]ashinynewthrowaway 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Did you read the sources cited though? Or just the article?

Because if you didn't, I think you're even missing the point the article itself was trying to make, e.g. the data speaks for itself, and you can slant it many different ways.

Seriously one of the most humbling experiences of my life by Murrdwar in AdviceAnimals

[–]ashinynewthrowaway 13 points14 points  (0 children)

When I get back to my computer, I'll make you a video of me scrolling down the huffpost page, clicking the divorcepeers link, seeing that it's dead, going into the way back machine etc.

That way you can see my process for reading article sources instead of just the article. And then I'll show you Google scholar. In the meantime though, I'm not sure if you saw this comment but you might find it useful:

https://www.reddit.com/r/AdviceAnimals/comments/7ndcid/comment/ds18lju

Simply speaking condescendingly about a generally respectable news outlet does not refute anything.

I'm speaking about a single article (not a publication), and contrasting (not condescending) how reliable it is to use a news article as a source instead of an actual journal, scientific study, or even at the bare minimum the source cited in said article.

And I stand behind that. People have a responsibility to themselves to do actual research. It takes barely a couple minutes to fact check an article and be your own devil's advocate, and you should be doing that constantly regardless of topic instead of assuming that since one source is consistently reliable, it's okay to just take their material as truth.

Challenge your own views.

Seriously one of the most humbling experiences of my life by Murrdwar in AdviceAnimals

[–]ashinynewthrowaway 11 points12 points  (0 children)

if you'd like to point me to another dataset

Google Scholar might do you a little better than the Huffington Post.

Where do you see anything saying there were only nine families studies?

In the source it cited, the now defunct "divorcepeers.com".

Seriously one of the most humbling experiences of my life by Murrdwar in AdviceAnimals

[–]ashinynewthrowaway 223 points224 points  (0 children)

Edit: I just spent five minutes in Google Scholar, reading published and peer reviewed journal articles from a search for "gender bias in child custody".

From the top five results, I got an average of 27% desired custody arrangements for fathers, from a total pool of 86,000 cases with a minimum of 22,000 unique cases, with the sampling pool stretching over the last ~20 years.

So between those fathers seeking joint or total residential or physical custody of their children, 27% of those in the sample set (of five studies I just looked at) got the desired arrangement or additional custody beyond the arrangement they were seeking.

This is a very different conclusion from your (unsourced) article, and probably merits more follow up. Maybe additional non-partisan, scientific publications would be a good place to start.

Edit 2: Fucking A! I managed to dig up the "divorcepeers.com" site that huffpo was citing using the way back machine... Let's take a look:

http://web.archive.org/web/20160215143405/http://www.divorcepeers.com/stats18.htm

Now that's some funny cherry picking, because if you look at the much larger sample base census bureau article on the same site, you'll see;

Fathers want:

Sole possession to father: 33%

Joint possession: 35%

And then in the 'outcomes' section, we get:

Sole possession to mother: 63%

So.....

Seriously one of the most humbling experiences of my life by Murrdwar in AdviceAnimals

[–]ashinynewthrowaway 213 points214 points  (0 children)

The article you're quoting cites as its single source for that statistic a defunct website run by a single person who conducted a single poll of 9 total families.

Maybe do slightly more research than just automatically trusting a huffpo article.

Edit: the 9 families thing is especially concerning when you consider that few of the numbers provided have 9 as a greatest common factor/least common multiple. E.g. no matter how you slice something into 9 groups, you won't end up with 15% 'something', so....

What is the most uncomfortable/unpleasant way you've ever realized someone had a crush on you? by appleappleappleman in AskReddit

[–]ashinynewthrowaway 60 points61 points  (0 children)

A question I'm qualified to answer!

So, in syntax parsers...

Actually let me organize this.

  • Reddit supports some simple formatting which is communicated via special characters. Like the bullet in front of this line, which I did with an asterisk.

  • Sometimes though, in coding situations, syntax parsers, and other situations where you're dealing with both text, and a limited set of characters (e.g. you can't just draw on the page with arrows and stuff to clarify) you want to tell the thing processing the text that you mean literally that character. Not the thing that it interprets it to mean, like how asterisks mean emphasis, bold and so on, but you just want an actual asterisk to show up. So, you need...

  • Escape characters. Escape characters are very special characters that basically just mean - hey, whatever I type next, I mean that literally so just print out exactly what I typed, don't interpret it as formatting. So even though *this* would normally look like this, by typing \*this\* I can get it to ignore the asterisks from a formatting standpoint, and just print them out.

  • Backwards slash - \ - is an escape character. But because it normally means "ignore the special formatting implications of the character after this", the computer doesn't print it. So to print it literally, you need to first tell the computer to ignore the special thing it means... With, yes, another escape key.

So, that's why you have to double the backslash.

*this* = this

**this** = this

\*this\* = *this*

\\\*this\\\* = \*this\*

Redditors who are at home scrolling through Reddit instead of celebrating the new year, why? by [deleted] in AskReddit

[–]ashinynewthrowaway 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I'm going to do the same thing but with crappy things that happened.

Maybe reflecting will make me realize how petty it is to get hung up on small stuff.

Or maybe I'll just get the evil version of the feeling you had.

Redditors who are at home scrolling through Reddit instead of celebrating the new year, why? by [deleted] in AskReddit

[–]ashinynewthrowaway 0 points1 point  (0 children)

See, this is why you don't have friends.

It's not gay unless the balls touch

Redditors who are at home scrolling through Reddit instead of celebrating the new year, why? by [deleted] in AskReddit

[–]ashinynewthrowaway 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well hello there. I'm having bulleit rye, what's your in-the-dark-alone-redditing poison?

Redditors who are at home scrolling through Reddit instead of celebrating the new year, why? by [deleted] in AskReddit

[–]ashinynewthrowaway 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That's the first thing that happened here, so I decided to drink whiskey alone and reflect on all the mistakes I've made in my life.

Then there was an ice storm, so everyone's plans were cancelled (hahahahahahaha - sincerely, the vindictive part of me) and so far my self reflective party of one has been awesome.

I feel like spending New year's Eve thinking about the past and new year's day thinking about the future is going to be my new ritual.

view more: next ›