27
0

National Political Incorrectness Day


 invite response                
2015 Sep 19, 9:40am   327,759 views  3,865 comments

by Patrick   ➕follow (61)   💰tip   ignore  

How about a national day where everyone is encouraged to say politically incorrect things?

What would you say? You don't have to actually believe what you say, it just has to be provoctive.

"Barefoot and pregnant is the way I like 'em."

"Good lord you are FAT!"

"I have a lawnmower. His name is Jose."

"Speak English"
#politics

« First        Comments 3,501 - 3,540 of 3,865       Last »     Search these comments

3502   AmericanKulak   2024 May 11, 1:46pm  

gabbar says









Fuentes is a Fed, and probably a Groomer. He has no enemies on the right, he only attacks the center-right. He seldom attacks the Left. His job is to destablize the populis right so the status quo can win. Bookmark this.
3503   richwicks   2024 May 11, 1:59pm  

AmericanKulak says

gabbar says










Fuentes is a Fed, and probably a Groomer. He has no enemies on the right, he only attacks the center-right. He seldom attacks the Left. His job is to destablize the populis right so the status quo can win. Bookmark this.

Only time you've said anything resembling you can use your brain.
3504   AmericanKulak   2024 May 11, 2:28pm  

I just went to X and saw this right away. I didn't have to look for this example, it fell into my lap while I was looking for Trump Rally stream.


3509   gabbar   2024 May 18, 8:47am  

Nina Turner is a Democratic politician from Cleveland, Ohio area

3510   Ceffer   2024 May 18, 10:47am  

gabbar says

Nina Turner is a Democratic politician from Cleveland, Ohio area

LOL! Ghetto pathogen philosophy: grow up with Mama beating it into your thick hide and skull that robbing Whitey is honorable. Then, puzzle when the doors clang shut on you in prison. Moral imbeciles with a Soros pay stub are still moral imbeciles.
3511   gabbar   2024 May 19, 5:06am  

AmericanKulak says

I just went to X and saw this right away.

After its woke owners were bought out by Elon, Twitter is the wild wild west of the world, not just the US, right now.
3512   gabbar   2024 May 20, 7:29am  

Our society is run by insane people for insane objectives. I think we're being run by maniacs for maniacal ends and I think I'm liable to be put away as insane for expressing that. That's what's insane about it.” – John Lennon
3513   gabbar   2024 May 21, 2:51am  

Anyone know who she is?
3516   Patrick   2024 May 25, 11:14am  




I do think that dual citizenship should be absolutely prohibited.

You're American or you're not, no other options.
3517   Ceffer   2024 May 25, 3:44pm  

An admissions slot for UCLA Med School just opened up.

https://t.me/qthestormrider777/21448
3518   Ceffer   2024 May 25, 3:45pm  

On the bright side, she could identify 800 brands of sneakers and fingernail polish, and spot an Uzi bulge three blocks away. Also, it stimulates the 'lame excuses' cortex when challenged. One needs culturally appropriate material.

https://t.me/qthestormrider777/21434
3519   Ceffer   2024 May 25, 3:45pm  

Well, it's definitely not the Department of Weight Corrections. On the bright side, they don't need bullet proof vests, they can carry a fusillade in those rolls and never skip a beat.



https://resistthemainstream.com/correction-officer-under-fire-over-racist-biscuits-and-gravy-post-sparks-firestorm-online/

3520   gabbar   2024 May 25, 6:19pm  

https://x.com/calleymeans?lang=en

How the fook can this go on?
3521   Ceffer   2024 May 27, 10:33am  

Hey, don't knock, it. They're packing and heading to Harvard and UCLA Med bearing Netflix scripts.

https://t.me/SGTnewsNetwork/67486
3522   Patrick   2024 May 31, 8:25pm  




OK, it is funny.
3523   DemocratsAreTotallyFucked   2024 Jun 2, 8:21am  

The I Am Ready To Settle Down Now Burger:


3524   Ceffer   2024 Jun 2, 10:12am  

Yeasty!
UkraineIsTotallyFucked says

The I Am Ready Too Settle Down Now Burger:



3528   HeadSet   2024 Jun 9, 3:09pm  




Ironically, he is showing stupidity by confusing mean (average) with median.
3530   DemocratsAreTotallyFucked   2024 Jun 9, 5:09pm  

HeadSet says

Ironically, he is showing stupidity by confusing mean (average) with median.


How?
3531   Ceffer   2024 Jun 9, 5:13pm  

UkraineIsTotallyFucked says


HeadSet says


Ironically, he is showing stupidity by confusing mean (average) with median.


How?


The 'mean' is the midpoint at which fifty percent of data points are above and fifty percent below. The data points can be weighted, however, so that the 'average' can be some value at variance with the mean. The 'average' value, for instance, might be at the data points that are forty percent below and sixty percent above due to weighting, or some other point.

People use them interchangeably but they are not the same thing. He should have said 'mean' rather than 'average'.
3532   HeadSet   2024 Jun 9, 5:16pm  

UkraineIsTotallyFucked says

HeadSet says


Ironically, he is showing stupidity by confusing mean (average) with median.


How?

Mean (average) is summing up n numbers and dividing by n. The average is rarely the middle point. The point in a group of numbers where half are below and half are above called the median.
3533   DemocratsAreTotallyFucked   2024 Jun 9, 6:14pm  

HeadSet says


Mean (average) is summing up n numbers and dividing by n. The average is rarely the middle point. The point in a group of numbers where half are below and half are above called the median.
« First    « Previous    Comments 3,494 - 3,532 of 3,532


So?

You can derive a number from an average and apply a median to that, too. It's deriving a median
from a subset of numbers, so what?
3534   HeadSet   2024 Jun 9, 8:30pm  

UkraineIsTotallyFucked says

You can derive a number from an average and apply a mean to that,

?? "Mean" and "average" are synonymous.
3536   stereotomy   2024 Jun 10, 3:49am  

HeadSet says


UkraineIsTotallyFucked says


HeadSet says


Ironically, he is showing stupidity by confusing mean (average) with median.


How?


Mean (average) is summing up n numbers and dividing by n. The average is rarely the middle point. The point in a group of numbers where half are below and half are above called the median.


Standardized tests like the SAT and the Stanford-Binet IQ test are taken by millions of people. As such, the law of large numbers applies; namely, the distribution of the standardized distribution of scores (score - mean)/(std. deviation of score) converges to a normal distribution with mean 0 and standard deviation of 1. A normal distribution is symmetric about its mean; i.e., mean=median.

In this case, Carlin is right, although to @Headset's point, it might be coincidental if Carlin is unaware of the law of large numbers and how standardized test scores are distributed.

Disclosure: Statistician by training.
3537   HeadSet   2024 Jun 10, 6:49am  

stereotomy says

Standardized tests like the SAT and the Stanford-Binet IQ test are taken by millions of people. As such, the law of large numbers applies

Good point. I did not think that IQ would fit a normal distribution, but I looked it up and you are correct. I suspect that is because, as you said, the large n and also because of the relatively small number of possible scores (about 200?).
3538   stereotomy   2024 Jun 10, 7:03am  

HeadSet says


stereotomy says


Standardized tests like the SAT and the Stanford-Binet IQ test are taken by millions of people. As such, the law of large numbers applies

Good point. I did not think that IQ would fit a normal distribution, but I looked it up and you are correct. I suspect that is because, as you said, the large n and also because of the relatively small number of possible scores (about 200?).


It applies generally, even to discrete distributions (like the Poisson distribution which has as its basis the counting numbers 0,1,2, . . . ). As long as N is sufficiently large, any distribution of the mean of a sample from a population/source distribution will converge to a normal distribution. IIRC this is the weak law of large numbers. There is a strong law of large numbers as well.

PatNet - the place to share and learn.
3539   HeadSet   2024 Jun 10, 7:43am  

stereotomy says

any distribution of the mean of a sample from a population/source distribution will converge to a normal distribution.

I presume you are referring to taking a sample distribution of sample means, and that would plot out as normal regardless of the actual distribution of the original data. I used to do that trick in order to force a normal so that I could use normal tools, and not have to work with Poisson, Chi, and the like. Funny how you mentioned Poisson, because that is what I assumed the IQ distro would look like before looking it up. But then, my experience has been with thousands or less of data points (traffic, call center, academics), and I rarely saw anything that came out as a normal distribution. Long ago, but now that I think about it, the whole point of those other distributions was to extract data when one did not have the money or time to collect enough data points to generate a Normal distribution naturally.
3540   stereotomy   2024 Jun 10, 9:12am  

@Headset,

I think we're talking about the same thing. If you take a very large sample from a distribution and calculate the mean, then do it again and again, you'll get a highly symmetric normal distribution for the means. If you take multiple smaller samples and compute the mean, you'll get a distribution of the means that is almost normal, but not quite.

You might be talking about the Strong Law of Large Numbers - almost sure convergence, as opposed to the Weak Law - convergence in probability.

If you have messy data, you can use bootstrap, jackknife or other resampling techniques to simulate larger samples. Generally, to get the "easy" solution where you can run inference on a normal distribution, you need either 1) a distribution which is approximately normal, in which case you can get by with a smaller sample size (think binomial with p=0.5) or 2) a very large sample size for distributions which are highly skewed or otherwise ill-behaved (Cauchy).

Anything I said before does NOT apply to most other statistics. If you need upper or lower quantiles of the distribution, then you'll have to probably use empirical quantiles (rank-ordering the values in your sample) as opposed to using normally distributed quantiles. Quantiles are almost always necessary for inferential statistics (proving a hypothesis) as opposed to descriptive statistics (describing the distribution). With cheap computing, Nonparametric Statistics is almost as good nowdays.

Interesting historical fact - R. A. Fisher (one of the titans in the field) ended up exploring parametric statistics because it was too hard to calculate nonparametric statistics by hand, at least in the late 1800's / early 1900's. He thought parametrics were an excellent approximation to real, nonparametric statistics.

« First        Comments 3,501 - 3,540 of 3,865       Last »     Search these comments

Please register to comment:

api   best comments   contact   latest images   memes   one year ago   random   suggestions   gaiste