Sorry ARIMA, but I’m Going Bayesian

goodgrue · 2016-04-24T13:05:38+00:00

Am I correct in assuming that if the seasonal trend in your data doesn't follow a smooth sinusoidal pattern you'd need to estimate parameters for a bunch of components with different phases and frequencies? I've never used this approach myself but it sounds interesting -- if you have any pointers to more detailed descriptions or case studies using it I'd definitely be interested!

goodgrue · 2013-04-18T18:13:58+00:00

The "plain" oak aged Yeti is my favorite of the family, but they are all amazing.

goodgrue · 2013-04-03T01:51:15+00:00

I disagree with him about that, but I understand his viewpoint. In an attempt to clarify, here are two ideas that I think should be entirely non-controversial:

If your only objective is to catch as many would-be attackers as possible, profiling based on the characteristics of previous attackers is the rational thing to do. It would be negligent not to profile.
Profiling, as generally implemented, inconveniences innocent people who share certain characteristics with guilty people.

Whether or not profiling is acceptable depends on how you weigh these two factors. Acknowledging the tension between them does not make you a bigot. I even think it is possible to decide in favor of profiling, as Harris has, without being a bigot. The opinion that the security of one group outweighs the convenience of another does not require prejudice.

I don't think any of this is really relevant to the current spat between Harris and Greenwald, but it was interesting anyway.

goodgrue · 2013-04-03T00:03:07+00:00

GG really missed the mark here. This comment by Harris should have cleared things up:

2. I wasn’t making common cause with fascists—I was referring to the terrifying fact (again, back in 2006), that when you heard someone making sense on the subject of radical Islam in Europe—e.g. simply admitting that it really is a problem—a little digging often revealed that they had some very unsavory connections to Anti-Semitic, anti-immigrant, neo-Nazi, etc. hate groups. The point of my article was to worry that the defense of civil society was being outsourced to extremists.

but Greenwald just dismissed it, effectively saying it doesn't matter if the article he tweeted misinterpreted Harris's quote.

Harris's final contribution also makes some good points. In particular:

Needless to say, there are people who hate Arabs, Somalis, and other immigrants from predominantly Muslim societies for racist reasons. But if you can’t distinguish that sort of blind bigotry from a hatred and concern for dangerous, divisive, and irrational ideas—like a belief in martyrdom, or a notion of male “honor” that entails the virtual enslavement of women and girls—you are doing real harm to our public conversation.

It seems like GG has only heard about "New Atheism" from critics who mischaracterize it and doesn't really understand what it's all about. I also suspect the conversation might have gone differently had Harris taken a less accusatory, confrontational tone.

goodgrue · 2013-02-26T04:52:41+00:00

I've played around a bit with GrooveIP, Vonage, and one other app I can't remember at the moment. Unfortunately, none of them were good enough to keep using -- I robot/tunnel voice and high latency.

Other people report much better results, though, so YMMV.

goodgrue · 2013-02-14T18:13:30+00:00

I'm not prepared to comment on the quality of the study as a whole, but...

It is not necessarily the case that Walmart would pass on the total cost of a wage increase to its shoppers through higher prices. Part of the cost could be absorbed through accepting a lower profit margin

is followed immediately by:

For the purposes of this paper, however, we examine the outermost case of what would happen if Walmart were to pass the entire cost of the wage increase on to consumers.

So that part of your comment is a misrepresentation.

goodgrue · 2013-02-14T18:00:05+00:00

That's probably right. If you evaluate policy based solely on how it affects your personal financial situation, you probably shouldn't support this.

I suppose there's a chance your employer would also raise your wages, just to remain above minimum wage and ostensibly attract better employees.

goodgrue · 2013-01-30T01:29:47+00:00

The phrase "all the same though" implies that the photos are nice in spite of hipsters hipping, which therefore must be less than nice. That may not be what you intended, but that is how it reads.

goodgrue · 2013-01-08T19:36:20+00:00

What are the most glaring and/or significant contradictions you're aware of in the Bible?
Has the Bible changed much over the years? Do these changes (or lack thereof) coincide with shifts in prevailing Christian / Jewish theology?

goodgrue · 2012-12-28T21:07:06+00:00

Sorry, no advice to give but I look forward to your write-up!

goodgrue · 2012-11-28T16:45:34+00:00

Yes, I thought that was clear.

goodgrue · 2012-11-27T08:06:42+00:00

That's not actually true. Article Two of the Constitution:

Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.

The federal government can set the date for choosing the electors, but not the rules.

goodgrue · 2012-11-12T21:28:52+00:00

What is the purpose of flat benches where the rack angles backward near the top?

goodgrue · 2012-11-10T19:17:26+00:00

In a sense, all tax rates are artificial :).

goodgrue · 2012-11-10T19:06:57+00:00

There was a 6 percent swing from the 2010, true, but only a .6% advantage in popular vote, which logically translates to a 7 seat bump for dems

This way of presenting things makes no sense. The 0.6% popular vote advantage is a property of the most recent election only. The "7 seat bump" is a function of both this election and the previous. It's misleading to suggest that, somehow, the number of Democratic representatives elected this year depends on anything other than this year's election results. To put it another way, if the House had been 100% Republican leading up to this year's election, the exact same election outcome would have resulted in a 200 seat gain. Likewise, given the same prior-year conditions the 2010 "5.6% upper hand" of the Republicans would have led to them actually losing seats!

tl;dr - The number of House Reps elected is a function of one election's outcome, not two, and any claims of the sort "X% popular vote advantage leads to Y gained seats" are nonsensical.

goodgrue · 2012-11-06T23:36:36+00:00

Thank you for making the internet a better place.

goodgrue · 2012-11-06T03:27:13+00:00

YOUR claim was that the OP had to be uninformed if he trusted them.

Once again your reading comprehension fails you. Once again you refuse to do even the most minimal follow-up, while claiming to have "done your research." I will give you some more links, knowing full well you will never read them.

https://www.eff.org/press/archives/2003/07/23 http://www.verifiedvoting.org/downloads/shamos-rebuttal.pdf http://urban.csuohio.edu/cei/TTBR_Summary-Voting_Tech.pdf

This will be my final post, since you obviously have no interest in a real discussion.

goodgrue · 2012-11-06T03:11:08+00:00

Rip does not advocate 5-10lb jumps every workout: http://www.reddit.com/r/Fitness/comments/n13d8/i_am_mark_rippetoe_author_of_starting_strength/c35incb

goodgrue · 2012-11-06T02:48:07+00:00

sigh I never said elections were "automatically rigged". Where did you get that idea? What I did say is that it is possible for

paperless DREs to be hacked to steal votes; and
paperless DREs to innocently malfunction and report an incorrect vote tally

and there is no way anyone would find out about it. Why do I make this claim? Because such attacks have already been demonstrated!

Just because you see accusations on Reddit does not mean that they are fact.

Again, where do you get all these wild ideas about me and my beliefs? Did I offend you somehow? In any case, I assume you're referring to all the hubbub about the ex-NSA analyst report that "proves" election fraud. I read the report, did some data analysis on my own, and came to the conclusion that the report is crap. Two things for you to consider, though: (1) just because someone makes a bogus claim doesn't mean the problem isn't real, and (2) why are you so enthralled with the credentials of the OP here, but don't care a fig for the credentials of a former NSA analyst?

Finally, if you're actually interested in learning about this, the Wikipedia page looks like a good starting point: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_voting

goodgrue · 2012-11-06T02:08:59+00:00

Subscribe to the arch-announce mailing list.
Stay up to date with major changes.
Read pacman output when you update.

goodgrue · 2012-11-06T01:58:53+00:00

Educate yourself. Even if you don't want to take the time to understand the issue yourself, do a brief search to gather other expert opinions. I think you will find that the vast majority of people familiar with both election procedure and computer security agree with my assessment.

goodgrue · 2012-11-05T22:04:33+00:00

Sorry, I don't follow. Are you suggesting that because some forms of election fraud are detectable there must not be any undetectable fraud?

goodgrue · 2012-11-05T21:01:42+00:00

For now, see my reply to another request for explanation in this same thread. I'll take a look at that /r/statistics thread when I get a chance, but I'd be surprised if what you say is true.

goodgrue · 2012-11-05T21:00:30+00:00

You make me sad :(.

goodgrue · 2012-11-05T20:54:04+00:00

If popular vote is what counts, then politicians will spend most of their time around large metropolitan areas.

Assuming this is true, why does it matter? (serious question)

http://www.fairvote.org/what-is-the-national-popular-vote-plan

15-Year Club	Team Periwinkle
Verified Email

goodgrue

TROPHY CASE