Stupid World

[Brian d marge]

Fuck all rich about me, dude, I'm the one earning just enough to be in the group paying the most tax.

http://www.beehive.govt.nz/sites/all...March_2015.png

thanks

us poor appreciate ur efforts

Sent from my SC-01G using Tapatalk

[Ocean1]

I wasn't saying fuck you to you though.

There's those lack of comprehension skills again.

*Shrugs* Fuck you @ the rich pricks is fucking ungracious though.

They not only pay the tab for govt spending but cover the tip for those that don't.

[mashman]

Incorrect.

In a general senese you actually graph all results, and if outliers are seen, investigate and remove if they are erroneous. Ie, if somebody mistyped and recorded a pommy git from welly earning 359billion, they'd see it on the graph and go hang on, that doesn't seem right, check back and go nah mate, this guy is clearly up to fuck all and someone added about 9 too many zeroes; so they then fix the data entry mistake.

But if you're just going to sit in the dunce corner flinging insults, I'll leave you with it, at least you're in the properly titled thread this time...

Actually, if you're as well read as you claim, it's as simple as reading what he posted and pointing out how/why it is inaccurate.

Yes, there are outliers that are removed at both ends of the dataset before the data is crunched... however when the program runs it automatically removes outliers, again at both ends, that would otherwise break the program. There is no data fix for this. If you wish to stop the removal of some of the program discarded outliers, then the method being used must have a parameter/weighting "refined".

What insults?

I'm not claiming that I'm well read, I'm claiming that I've actually seen it happen i.e. watched with breakpoints, siphoned off the outliers before they're automatically removed for further analysis (not data fixing). I was given a book to read in order to help me get my head around the methods being used and how the outcomes were being formed, but that was just 1 book briefly covering 5 or 6 "methodologies".

[Katman]

*Shrugs* Fuck you @ the rich pricks is fucking ungracious though.

It's from the heart though.

[bogan]

now we aare back on track

pure garbage

as an engineer even when u know the results more often or not u will be using a line of best fit

if and only if all the planets line up on yur great grandmother 101st birthday you may get close to a exact repeatable result exact is the wrong word

so back on topic

bin sultan and george soros worked their arses off and though hard work and good fortune they became rich

You're getting confused about how to apply stats. A line of best fit is not necessarily something that applies to surveys, however it does applies to physical laws and the like. So it's another strawman, and no valid points raised about the article in question (which didn't even have a straight line fitted, just in case you missed that bit ).

[bogan]

Yes, there are outliers that are removed at both ends of the dataset before the data is crunched... however when the program runs it automatically removes outliers, again at both ends, that would otherwise break the program. There is no data fix for this. If you wish to stop the removal of some of the program discarded outliers, then the method being used must have a parameter/weighting "refined".

What insults?

I'm not claiming that I'm well read, I'm claiming that I've actually seen it happen i.e. watched with breakpoints, siphoned off the outliers before they're automatically removed for further analysis (not data fixing). I was given a book to read in order to help me get my head around the methods being used and how the outcomes were being formed, but that was just 1 book briefly covering 5 or 6 "methodologies".

That's misapplication of methodology. If you'd read what Ocean posted you'd know that wasn't the case in that one, nor is it the case in any other where proper scientific method is observed.

That was directed at another poster entirely, hence why I quoted him. Perhaps you should just start with read.

[mashman]

That's misapplication of methodology. If you'd read what Ocean posted you'd know that wasn't the case in that one, nor is it the case in any other where proper scientific method is observed.

That was directed at another poster entirely, hence why I quoted him. Perhaps you should just start with read.

Is it? I'll tell him that his entire distinguished career has been a sham the next time I see him. I'm sure he'll thank you for it.

So it was, my bad.

[bogan]

Is it? I'll tell him that his entire distinguished career has been a sham the next time I see him. I'm sure he'll thank you for it.

Seems to me you've already been lamenting the whole field as a sham based on his work, so it would be only courteous to say it to his face.

The misapplication to which I refer is you assuming such a method is used in the article under discussion; it's not, you'd know that if you read it and understood it.

[J.A.W.]

Seems to me you've already been lamenting the whole field as a sham based on his work, so it would be only courteous to say it to his face.

The misapplication to which I refer is you assuming such a method is used in the article under discussion; it's not, you'd know that if you read it and understood it.

Spare me bloody days..

Bogus, your whole inchoate blather act - is nought but a lame rehash of old 'Harry Worth' routines..

[mashman]

Seems to me you've already been lamenting the whole field as a sham based on his work, so it would be only courteous to say it to his face.

The misapplication to which I refer is you assuming such a method is used in the article under discussion; it's not, you'd know that if you read it and understood it.

I was the one who "cornered" him. Been there, done that and gained understanding of his work. Something you should try someday.

I read it. I understood it. It's still best guess. You'd know that if you had any actual experience with these things. You quite obviously don't... but please carry on.

[mashman]

Spare me bloody days..

Bogus, your whole inchoate blather act - is nought but a lame rehash of old 'Harry Worth' routines..

Nah, he's just too shy to walk away and would rather I laughed at him. Kinda sweet really.

[Brian d marge]

You're getting confused about how to apply stats. A line of best fit is not necessarily something that applies to surveys, however it does applies to physical laws and the like. So it's another strawman, and no valid points raised about the article in question (which didn't even have a straight line fitted, just in case you missed that bit ).

no not confused

i use stats when setting up tolerances of drawings H7/h6

If that aint a statistical fit i dont know what is

as for article quoted . . Im not sure which one u are referring to

Ocean the dear chap had some charts which showed how we are all doing fine finerer thanks to the like of bin sultan big daddie warburgs and uncle george (soros)

cos they paid taxes and all ( they do and is a good reason why they are to big to fail cos places like london need the tax take )
Now Ive read a fair bit and not often do u see texts sayin its all good in the emerald city with me green glasses on
but I will look into it and return ....
already ... if u look at the title... gdp to population.....all it would need is one lord palmerston or a prescott to lift the average up but i wont comment untill ive read it

finally never had a thing for strawmen ,...always preferred Dorothy me self




Sent from my SC-01G using Tapatalk

[bogan]

no not confused

i use stats when setting up tolerances of drawings H7/h6

If that aint a statistical fit i dont know what is

as for article quoted . . Im not sure which one u are referring to

Ocean the dear chap had some charts which showed how we are all doing fine finerer thanks to the like of bin sultan big daddie warburgs and uncle george (soros)

cos they paid taxes and all ( they do and is a good reason why they are to big to fail cos places like london need the tax take )
Now Ive read a fair bit and not often do u see texts sayin its all good in the emerald city with me green glasses on
but I will look into it and return ....
already ... if u look at the title... gdp to population.....all it would need is one lord palmerston or a prescott to lift the average up but i wont comment untill ive read it

finally never had a thing for strawmen ,...always preferred Dorothy me self




Sent from my SC-01G using Tapatalk

Yeh, you're defintely confused about em, income stats has fuck all to do with setting engineering tolerances. You don't fit a straight line to income stats. The article from which the graph's ocean posted is of course what is being referred to, again, something you'd know if you were well read. The only people bringing up such straight line fits are those playing with strawmen.

I read it. I understood it.

So, specifically, which bit refers to the removal of outliers?

[mashman]

So, specifically, which bit refers to the removal of outliers?

bwaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa... so you've got nothing then, not even an understanding of how the actual programs that create these stats work. How about you summarise it for the boys and girls instead

[Brian d marge]

Yeh, you're defintely confused about em, income stats has fuck all to do with setting engineering tolerances. You don't fit a straight line to income stats. The article from which the graph's ocean posted is of course what is being referred to, again, something you'd know if you were well read. The only people bringing up such straight line fits are those playing with strawmen.



So, specifically, which bit refers to the removal of outliers?

Mate only you are talking about fitting straight lines to income stats .... and as for the article seems your reading skills aint what they used to be
As I pointed out I haven't had the chance to read the article , which is why I differed and gave Ocean the benefit of the doubt UNTIL I could read the article . That is what I said .....

forget straw-man arguments , you just need to get the basics right first ..

In the mean time , wander downstairs , have a look at someone working , say an NC machine , somewhere near the machine there will be a clip board with all the measurements on it , upper deviations and lower .... good luck with those straight lines ..............