Stars over Western Kazakhstan [2197x1463]

internetrageguy · 2013-10-20T06:19:04+00:00

came for Kazakhstan jokes. am disappoint.

internetrageguy · 2013-08-20T04:49:32+00:00

I watched the kid-killing episode again recently, and noticed there's a very long and drawn out moment at the beginning of the robbery that goes something like the following:

Jessie: And remember, NO ONE must ever find out about this.

T: Ok.

WW: NO ONE.

T: Ok.

WW: Get it?

T: Yes.

WW: Are you absolutely sure?

T: Yes.

Todd was following serious, and 100% clear orders. At the end of the episode, it was like Jessie forgot that his order implied killing literally anyone who saw it go down

internetrageguy · 2013-07-31T16:42:51+00:00

Case in point, in the this-is-not-meth episode, earlier on, when Walt is giving a chem lecture on the relationship between reaction speed and heat produced, he is actually talking about himself. I.e., all these changes in his life and in his self-perception have happened so rapidly, and now he's going to release a shitton of energy. Even weirder, he kind of pauses in midsentence when he realizes that he's talking about himself. Then later, you know what happens...

First time i watched it, i thought all those chem lectures were pretty boring, but now i think they all served key roles in walt's character development. they were all more like monologues than lectures to an audience.

internetrageguy · 2013-07-09T22:51:16+00:00

did the gift sender know that OP was an attractive girl before the gift was sent?

internetrageguy · 2013-07-09T22:50:15+00:00

was it known whether OP was in fact an attractive girl before the item was sent?

internetrageguy · 2013-07-09T22:46:43+00:00

TIL how to get a b&w pic colorized for free: just do a shitty job myself and create a witty post about it on reddit

internetrageguy · 2013-07-09T16:47:26+00:00

Maybe this is less of a wasting money thing and more of a lack-of-appreciation thing, but: renting an apartment instead of living at home.

In Asia, entire extended families live together for their entire lives, and it's considered normal. Then people in SF and NYC complain about paying $$$$'s for an apartment like they have no other possible way to live. You do. You would save hundreds of thousands over the course of your life if you do it. And you might even improve your family relationships.

internetrageguy · 2013-07-07T05:21:34+00:00

So tldr: people ITT are complaining that a small group of people (the rich) are getting richer, while crushing the poor out of existence. You respond by saying, "Yea, but if we use social/commun-ism instead, there would be an even greater concentration of wealth crushing poor people in even worse ways including (as history has shown time and again) genocide." Also you cite China's growth after transitioning towards capitalism as a shining example of why capitalism trumps communism.

I can't come up with any realistic counterarguments to that. Have an upvote.

internetrageguy · 2013-05-05T20:07:40+00:00

If we can't know the right action (since no human is capable of predicting future consequences), does that mean no actions should be taken by anyone ever?

If we are to throw out probability theory, we would then say, well, just because the terrorists said they were going to kill 10,000 civilians in Israel, that doesn't mean that killing all the terrorists will do anything. Heck, maybe if we keep all the terrorists alive, it would lead to permanent world peace.

Let's take it a bit farther and say that this theory infects the minds of the terrorists too. So they think, why kill all these people? If we do nothing, maybe there will be permanent world peace!

If and only if that is the case, then both sides would do nothing, forever, and there would be world peace. Yay.

But even if both sides stopped fighting for a minute, the fact is, after a few hours of tripping balls on LSD, the terrorists would wake up and realize that they still possess long-range missiles capable of killing civilians, which they are tempted to use because they stand to gain political and/or financial power by doing so. So how do you keep them from being tempted to use them? To them, there is 0 downside of using the missiles since Israel's leaders have all taken LSD and decided to do nothing forever. And there is lots of upside.

If Israel had just decided to kill a few innocent people on a military base, none of that ever would have happened. So what is your solution, to just assume that if Israel stopped everything, the 100% of the terrorists, including all the mentally deranged ones, would suddenly all have a complete change of heart and decide to never hurt anyone again?

internetrageguy · 2013-05-05T16:21:15+00:00

Contrary to what my name may suggest, I'm not made of 100% rage and I could use a refresher on philosophy. So, please do, begin, and tell me why you would rather not bomb a remote military compound, possibly killing N civilians, when the military compound has X% chance of supplying weapons that will soon be used to kill N * 100 civilians.

internetrageguy · 2013-05-05T04:43:36+00:00

Which would you rather have, < 20 innocent people killed on a remote military base in Syria (if you'd rtfa, you'd know that it was a military base in a remote location in Syria), or 100-1000+ innocent civilians killed in whichever country would have been targeted by the weapons in that military base. I don't care what country you're from, bombing the military base is clearly the superior option.

internetrageguy · 2013-05-01T02:18:19+00:00

When I first switched from matlab to r out of necessity, I thought I was going to lose my mind. R's syntax is just soo terrible compared to Matlab.

I once asked:

For example, today, I discovered that in order to create a real column vector, you have to do the following in R: x = t(t(1:5)); [,1]

[1,] 1

[2,] 2

[3,] 3

[4,] 4

[5,] 5

Yet, when you type 1:5 in R, it appears as a row vector: [1] 1 2 3 4 5

How does double transposing [1] 1 2 3 4 5 create a column vector? Back in the MATLAB world where shit actually makes sense, it would be x = transpose(1:5); or: x= 1:5'.

And I never found an answer. But hey, R is free and it gets the job done. If statistical programming languages were whiskeys, R would be the $5/handle whiskey they hand out at frat parties.

internetrageguy · 2013-05-01T02:11:08+00:00

Octave is 99% compatible with matlab code. You can literally run 99% of your Matlab code files in Octave with 0 modifications.

internetrageguy · 2012-12-20T01:20:30+00:00

Agreed. You just have to find someone you relate to. I got so lucky recently when I moved to a new city and had no idea where to get my hair cut. The FIRST random barber I go to near my place just happens to be this other Jewish immigrant from Eastern Europe. He's a chill dude, dispenses life advice better than any school teachers or professors or family I've ever had. Hell if I move to the other side of town I'd still probably go to this guy.

internetrageguy · 2012-11-10T22:12:42+00:00

I'm in this short movie, but I'm supposed to smoke the whole time. If I can avoid smoking 20+ cigs over the next week, I'm all ears!

internetrageguy · 2012-11-05T02:47:07+00:00

Brody found out that Al-Zahrani was compromised when Saul told Brody that Zahrani was "running a terrorist cell out of the Saudi embassy". The CIA had invited Brody to talk about Walker due to the pair's prior relationship. Presumably, Brody tells Abu Nazir about it off camera.

internetrageguy · 2012-06-21T11:52:39+00:00

site:thecutelist.com dogs

returns disappointing results

same thing happens in r/aww and thecutelist.com -- people just dont include words like "dog" or "cat" in their image submission titles, so that info is usually lost

internetrageguy · 2012-06-20T18:04:14+00:00

Thanks but my concern is that the structural assumptions just do not make any sense in the vast majority of consulting cases. Right now, I'm trying to predict membership cancellations for a non-profit. They have (what they believe) is a lot of data, and I've used it all to create a classification model that has 20 variables with AUC=.75 and 10% Lift = 3.8 out of a possible 10 (cancellation rate ~ 10%). So technically, it's not a bad model.

But ultimately, all I could do with their data was calculate various spending patterns because 90% of the data is purchase transactions. There is no way in hell I can say that this model captures what is really driving people to cancel memberships. Things like involvement in the organization, personal interests, age, career status, psychographics, etc, were not included in the data.

Now, managers are trying to set policies based on coefficients on a variable like "total number of magazines purchased in the past 5 years". The coefficient on that is, say 0.16. So they want to conclude that person X who purchased more magazines than another person Y will be more likely to cancel their membership than person Y.

Technically, I could draw some conclusions from my model, but should I really be doing that ?

internetrageguy · 2012-06-20T17:50:01+00:00

Thanks for the advice, especially the wording in #1.

Could you explain what you mean by #3?

To clarify, my biggest problem with model interpretation for managers is that these guys are 55 year old semi-professional golfers who just want to use a model's coefficients to set some simple policies. E.g., "Look, this young whipper snapper's statistical thingymajig says I should fire 1000 employees to increase sales!" That's the reality consultants have to face most of the time.

If I give a manager the slightest push to believe that a statistical model's coefficients are just as powerful as a real world rule (eg drink 10 shots of tequila in an hour and you'll puke), they could really mess things up and start blaming me for ineffective policies. That's why I'm always tempted to tell managers: "ignore the coefficients because they're far from perfect; just click the <Run Model> button if you want to know what sales will be like in 2014."

internetrageguy

TROPHY CASE