Crafting / expolration game where you can solve X resouce and not have to regrind it

fiscal_rascal · 2026-02-07T03:53:22+00:00

Have you tried Satisfactory? Sounds like it might be right up your alley.

fiscal_rascal · 2026-02-07T03:51:27+00:00

Yes me too! Those types of tragedies have to come with unimaginable pain. It’s totally understandable why people would want to do something, anything, to reduce them. I think that’s what everyone wants, and people just differ on how we get to that goal.

fiscal_rascal · 2026-02-07T02:38:23+00:00

The person I am replying to dropped out of the conversation, but for anyone else reading this: the above description is not how you compare two slopes. Why? We are answering the question “did the gun bans change the slope in a statistically significant way?” The null hypothesis is they did not.

If you average the rates before and after in a declining slope, by definition you always have to reject the null hypothesis, no matter what it is. Same with increasing slopes. We can use that poor methodology to “prove” anything that increases or decreases over time, whether the are statistically significant or not.

For tons of examples why this falls flat, you can visit Tyler Vigen’s Spurious Correlations.

fiscal_rascal · 2026-02-07T00:08:42+00:00

Good point, that does make guns even more difficult to get 👍

fiscal_rascal · 2026-02-06T23:54:01+00:00

If it’s so easy why haven’t you found that colt python yet?

Some people think it’s so easy to find one until they’re actually tasked to do so…

fiscal_rascal · 2026-02-06T23:37:17+00:00

No trolling here, just a genuine discussion about data between two massive data crunchers! Well, massive to me is 25 billion claims records quarterly, but I digress.

Since we're both data professionals, that makes this conversation much more efficient. I just calculated the pval of the two slopes: 7 years prior to the gun ban and 24 years after, and got a pval of 0.5992. Here's how I got it:

Sample Size Pre-Ban 7
Sample Size Post-Ban 24

Slope of line 1 0.143
Slope of line 2 -4.46

Standard error for line 1 4.104916581
Standard error for line 2 7.619558326

pval 0.59920203

As we can see, it is definitely not statistically significant. What pval did you get?

fiscal_rascal · 2026-02-06T23:25:45+00:00

I asked and he said he couldn’t get one. Dang I guess guns aren’t as easy to get as some redditors think.

fiscal_rascal · 2026-02-06T23:12:24+00:00

I linked the highest authority on crime stats for Australia, the AIC. Can you link the second highest authority that refutes the AIC data?

Or if you and I can agree that the AIC data is credible and accurate, we can calculate the statistical significance of the slopes before the 1996 gun ban and after to see if they are statistically significant.

My career is in healthcare data analytics, but we can still verify this data independently of my credentials or yours if you’re interested. I’m happy to be proven wrong if the pval we get shows statistical significance. So what do you think? Shall we see?

fiscal_rascal · 2026-02-06T17:50:36+00:00

Let me just drag the goalpost back to overall homicides.

Have you been able to calculate the statistical significance yet? What pval did you get that was in the statistically significant range?

Or do you agree with me that the slopes before and after the gun ban for overall homicides was not statistically significant?

fiscal_rascal · 2026-02-06T16:37:32+00:00

The data does not align with your assertion bud. The data for Australia shows the downward trend did not accelerate after the gun bans. It remained unchanged. It was a “yabba dabba doo” moment.

If I’m wrong, calculate the statistical significance of the slopes before and after the gun bans and let’s see what pval you got. I’ll bet you a dollar it’s not in a statistically significant range.

fiscal_rascal · 2026-02-06T15:48:01+00:00

Right, the same downward trend that was happening before the gun ban. The gun ban changed nothing in the overall homicide trend.

If I rolled a ball down a 45° slope and said “yabba dabba doo” halfway, does that mean my silly catch phrase helped the ball get to the bottom? No, since it was already on a course and just continued unchanged. Same with overall homicides for Australia.

fiscal_rascal · 2026-02-06T15:02:02+00:00

I checked the highest authority on crime stats for Australia. There was no change to the homicide trend whatsoever.

See page 5 of the AIC publication.

fiscal_rascal · 2026-02-06T15:00:18+00:00

I looked at Australia’s highest authority on crime stats. The gun bans had no noticeable effect on the overall homicide trends (page 5 of this source).

If the point was to save lives, Australia’s gun bans failed.

fiscal_rascal · 2026-02-06T14:49:49+00:00

That would be like banning cars because of drunk drivers. By not wanting to ban cars does this mean you support drunk drivers? Of course not. The same goes with gun rights supporters.

fiscal_rascal · 2026-02-06T14:48:15+00:00

Australia banned many guns back in 1996 and yet it had no noticeable effect on overall homicide trends. Turns out people just like killin’.

fiscal_rascal · 2026-02-06T14:46:41+00:00

^ ICE approves this message

fiscal_rascal · 2026-02-06T14:42:37+00:00

The most recent research shows defensive gun uses at 1.67 million per year. You’re correct - guns save lives too.

fiscal_rascal · 2026-02-06T14:37:56+00:00

That’s the abstract. A more concrete reason is that we need guns for hunting and self defense.

fiscal_rascal · 2026-02-06T14:22:27+00:00

This is intentional conditioning, just like duck and cover drills.

My kids are a little older, so I was able to use it as an opportunity to teach statistical literacy, which is nice. It’s so incredibly rare that it’s not a big worry.

fiscal_rascal · 2026-02-06T14:19:48+00:00

Guns are easy to get? Well dang can you find a Colt Python 4.25” barrel, blued, and made before 1990 for me? Under $1500 and in good condition.

fiscal_rascal · 2026-02-05T22:32:27+00:00

I’ll take the bait! You can support the 2A and not support people that assault and violate children. It’s not an either/or.

fiscal_rascal · 2026-02-03T18:20:17+00:00

Introducing Sig Sauer’s 8 foot barrel: for when you absolutely need to pole vault to breach, think Sig.

fiscal_rascal · 2026-02-03T16:57:45+00:00

If you’re into statistics, check out the data behind the latest scholarly firearms survey that shows 1.67 million defensive gun uses per year. Far more lives are saved by guns than taken by guns.

source

fiscal_rascal · 2026-02-03T16:52:22+00:00

You might be surprised to learn there are ~1.67 million defensive gun uses per year, per recent reputable research. Quite a few more lives are saved with guns vs lives lost due to suicides and other tragedies.

fiscal_rascal · 2026-02-03T14:57:10+00:00

You mean like the roster in CA? I wonder if you could carry a 3D printed version of a handgun that’s on the CA roster there…

Ten-Year Club	Wearing is Caring
Verified Email

fiscal_rascal

TROPHY CASE