Total posts: 5,766
Posted in:
-->
@Alec
I have camped. My record is 2 consecutive nights.
LMAO That is not what I asked. I asked whether you lived in a tent before, not whether you slept in a tent before. The distinction is obvious but just in case it wasn't I pointed it out in the first post I asked you in.
Okay so it is obvious that you have never lived in a tent. Let's move up the list from worse to best...
Have you ever lived in a car? a trailer? studio apartment? mobile home? decent sized apartment?
This is all off the top of my head, my fellow poor people please feel free to fill in the blanks. I am sure I am missing a few.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Alec
ASTAP no longer encourages poor people to live in a tent.
That does not answer my question. Let me try again:
Have you ever lived in a tent?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Alec
Is ASTAP better now?
Idk, I haven't looked. Probably not. You still have a lot of questions to answer buddy...
When did you live in a tent? What the hell does ASTAP stand for? Did your parents ever hug and/or drop you on the head as a child? Have you ever worked a single day in your life?
Would cleansing the dirty pesants through violent bloodshed truly bring you happiness or would it just bring you a brief period of euphoria that quickly turns into a wicked hangover the next day as you wake up and realize that the empty bottle laying on the nightstand in front of your face is really a deep sounding yet ultimately meaningless metaphor for that pathetic string of semi-related events and emotionally unfulfilling flings that you call a life?
Oh... nevermind that last one. That got off track...
Actually I only care about that first question. Nevermind any of those others. I don't care about any of your non-tent-living opinions right now. We can get to those later, one thing at a time.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Ramshutu
If stop and shops have less income from food, gas, stops as the low income users of these goods and services use them less - this means that you will have closures and layoffs due to decreased income.
Need to figure out what type of business his family owns so we can use this point but in the context of something he can more easily relate to (he clearly does not have enough empathy to relate to the rich kids whose parents own those businesses you mentioned)
I suspect at least one of them may be in insurance. Notice that in the excel spreadsheet he says he wants the lowest class people of his dystopia to pay at least $12k a year in insurance on their cardboard boxes and rusty hand-me-down dirtbikes.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Alec
Too tired to respond to all points
When did you live in a tent? Don't need an exact date, just a year.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Ramshutu
Glad I have only had to do one of those things, and the least bad one at that.
I picture Alecs backstory as involving two great role model parents that sat him down one day to explain that the reason he had to choose between having a pony or a helicopter ride for his birthday and could not have both was because they could not afford both due to his birthday being so close to tax season.
He chose the helicopter ride but goes to sleep every night wishing that he had chosen the pony so that he could have a loyal companion to share his lonliness with since all the other pesant children are so unworthy to be in his presense. Now he is on a quest to make sure no upper-class child ever has to face such traumatic heartbreak ever again.
Hey... that would make a great movie. (Hollywood, call me! There is so much more where that came from I promise!)
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Alec
If you can't afford to rent a house on your own, I never recommended a cardboard box.
I bought a house just fine, but I would not have been able to do so if I was sending 107% of my income to your bank account. Getting a loan under those conditions would be... problematic.
I recommended a tent and I've slept in a tent dozens of times. It's an effective shelter for people that protect them from rain and snow.
Nowhere did you say sleep in a tent for a few weeks, you said live in a tent. You have never lived in a tent in your life lmao.
You are definitely trolling. Your open embrace of the "those disgusting pesants don't deserve to live as well as they do" trope seals it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Alec
Poor people can't afford to get drunk.
We can't afford those $900 wine bottles your mommy and daddy regularly import from vineyards in France and Italy no, but we can afford to get drunk on cheap booze just fine.
Actually I guess if I was sending 107% of my paycheck directly to your bank account like what you propose here then I would not be able to but for now I can.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Ramshutu
Every single one of your absurd explanations for how human beings are going to live appears to start with:“They can just...”They “could”.What you don’t get, is that they’re not going to
That is not the worst part.
He wants to sentence a signifigant portion of the population to ridiculously reduced living standards, such as litterally living in cardboard boxes and using bikes as transport, just so his rich parents can afford to get him more toys because they won't have to pay taxes anymore.
The worst part is not that he thinks this is realistic (though you are correct that it isn't)... The worst part is that he thinks this is a good thing.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vaarka
Details: I had a full party, barely. I didn't lose too many pokemon (I think 8), but I had a lot of trouble catching them. Kept critting my first encounters. I'm now trying to write a story based off the nuzlocke, but without the very ending, it's... gonna be interesting.
Created:
This is definately relevant to the topic at hand. No funny business here.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Alec
12 hours a day. I found a way for them to survive off of 12 hours of work a day.
I would be truly shocked to find that you work more than 12 hours a week.
Also noticed that you recently changed your profile political ideology. Please change it back, this was so much funnier when you were pretending to be a libertarian.
Created:
-->
@bsh1
Just pinging some potential recruits...
nah bro
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@bsh1
Okay. I'll wait to get more feedback, but if that's the case, I will likely unpin this thread.
Come join us dude. Every Thursday. We just chill and do hang out and stuff. It will be fun.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Alec
My spreadsheet shows how someone who works a minimum wage job (I'm assuming you do)
You automatically assume anyone making less than 17k a year is working a minimum wage job?
That answers my question. Spoiled rich kid it is.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Alec
If you are an adult in the US, you get taxed $17,000 per year. This way, even if people gradually stop doing other things, the US still gets tax revenue.
Why does your tax plan require me to give 107% of my income to the government? Are you a spoiled rich kid that doesn't realize 17k is a lot of money for some people or did you accidently add an extra zero?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@SamStevens
@Vaarka
@blamonkey
See above. Invite open to anyone but you cool kids get special invites.
Every Thursday.
Created:
Posted in:
Got a weekly hangout-like thing going on with some ppl I know from other parts of the internet here we chill every Thursday night and listen to music together using www.watch2gether.com and teamspeak/discord. Anywhere between 4 to 7 of us usually. PM if interested in dropping in on the next one (or the current one if you read this within the next few hours I guess).
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
Ttii isbhfaid ttice tbatpwg
Ayme be ayse fe
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Zeichen
@SamStevens
@Vaarka
I can hangout tonight :)
Here's one for later today or whenever
I'll hop on that link for a bit sometime later.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@David
I just checked DDO. The religion forum is alive and well.
Just fact checked this, those are actually spam bots too. It is just hard to tell the because... religion forum.
Created:
Posted in:
Huh. I forgot for a few weeks that DART existed.
Anyone up for a hangout or two this weekend?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@keithprosser
Have we stopped the street epistemolgy yet? i said it was rubbish.
Lmao this thread officially escaped my understanding and I stopped following it about a few days ago when I woke up and saw a hundred or so new posts were made on the topic of... what was the topic?... whether or not we are capable of sitting down and doing nothing all day long if we have something that we need to do, right? Something like that.
SE is not a conversation method I have abandoned but I have abandoned this thread. Sorry.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@IlDiavolo
I'm not arguing which one has more information.
I know you aren't, it's just a question I am asking due to the fact that your claims rely on interpreting certain words such as "information" in certain very specific ways.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@keithprosser
I just watched that exact episode two nights ago on Hulu and now you just happen to be tagging me with that link...
You spying on me bro?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@keithprosser
I make the probability of 20 even digits as0.0000953674316%, based on 0.5^20.That's 9 fewer zeros than your figure 0.000000000000095%!
Okay I figured out the source of my error(s). It's complicated and would take several max character posts to explain in full detail (which I could do but choose not to) but here is the short version:
It involves the fact that in post 126 I rounded .9536 to 1 when making that "million times more likely" statement and the fact that at the time that I made post 126 the site was being really retarded and not allowing me to edit posts, which I tried to do quite heavily and ended up actually just having to delete a few posts and make new ones instead which made me a bit frusterated. The fact that my original posting of the formula itself during the arduous process of creating post 126 was more of an afterthought in the first place also factored in.
Then when I made post 135 two days later I used 126 for reference without double checking the numbers or facts at all.
It seems I actually had it correct somewhere in the making of post 126 as evidenced by the "million times more likely" statement (not 10 trillion... goddamnit I am retarded) but a combination of site malfunctions, frusteration, and taking my own word as gospel resulted in what little I was correct on being vastly overshadowed by the glaring incorrectness you noticed and pointed out (thanks for doing so by the way).
Like I said that is the short version. When I noticed my numbers were off by such a large margin I investigated for nearly an hour to figure out exactly where I went wrong and I now am pretty sure I know exactly step by step what happened but posting the entire process would be way too tedious to be worth it.
The important points are:
1) Your number is correct Keith, mine is incorrect.
2) The original point behind post 135 is still valid because a 1 in 1,000,000 prediction is still statistically significant because the reason it was significant in the first place was due to the fact that it was not a connection made post hoc, not because it was generally unlikely.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Outplayz
But please expand and tell me why exactly if i am wrong in what i'm seeing. Like i said, i'm bad at math... particularly statistics.In your psychic example, i see a weak experience. It's just one coincidence that she (she bc females love being psychics) got it right.
The chance that all 20 digits will be any combination at all of just even numbers with a particular button push is 0.000000000000095%. In other words the odds are about 1 to 10.5 trillion against any evens-only number sequence coming up.
The math used to arrive at this figure for the percentage is (100 ÷ 5^20). If you wish I will gladly explain why this is the correct formula to calculate this particular probability but that isn't really relevant to my point.
If someone correctly predicts that this incredibly unlikely occurance will happen on a particular button push before the button is pushed then that is a very statistically signifigant occurrence even if it occurs only once. (I am not saying that proves they are a psychic, that isn't the point anyway. All I am saying is that this prediction coming true is incredibly unlikely and if it did then that would be very significant).
The key words here are before the button is pushed. That is the most important part here. Any connections made purely post hoc are subject to personal bias in the very best of cases and completely useless in most others. The reason for this is because of the concept I mentioned before that I think you understand well about the unconscious mind being very good at seeing patterns but not necessarily that great at knowing whether a particular pattern is actually important or not.
So with that said hopefully I answered your question sufficiently. If you want me to go more into detail about any particular point or you have any other questions please do so. If you feel I did not answer your question sufficiently, misunderstood your question, or did not understand the answer please let me know that too.
Created:
Posted in:
My posts are showing up fine but I am unable to edit them. Instead of editing I am just deleting the old posts and making entirely new posts. What could possibly go wrong?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Outplayz
Edit: One thing i'll add that i think you feel i'm leaving out... yes, i do favor the "supernatural" (whatever that means) explanations more at this point.
You aren't leaving that out. As I just mentioned you already said back in post 58 that you think your supernatural explanation is more plausible.
If it is a random number generator, i would say they are equally just as likely.
Yes, both of those numbers are equally likely to appear if the digits are generated completely at random.
Because your justification is based on "This strong experience seems to me like a statistically significant occurrence" I would like to talk a bit more about statistics. Hopefully we can see if there is something to be learned that may help examine the situation.
Imagine as above an RNG machine that produces 20 random digits when a button is pressed. Allow me to outline two hypothetical scenarios which involve this machine.
In scenario one the button is pressed two times. The first time the machine produces the sequence "50165390173904751803". What is the chance of this precise number being produced? It is exactly 0.000000000000000001%.
That is a low percent chance but is this a statistically significant occurrence? No, it is not. The machine produced a random number just like it was supposed to, a number that does not match with any outside event. The button pusher just sees a random string of numbers
This occurrence is not statistically significant and the button pusher is not likely to think that it is.
The second time the machine produces the sequence "44444444444444444444". What is the chance of this precise number being produced? It is exactly 0.000000000000000001%.
That is a low percent chance but is this a statistically significant occurrence? No, it is not. The machine produced a random number just like it was supposed to, a number that does not match with any outside event.
However, the person pushing the button is a human and human brains are particularly adept at seeking out patterns. The person may easily see this and think to themselves "That is quite a coincidence. I have only pushed this button twice and it has already given me a sequence where all the digits are the same". This is quite misleading, however. The second number would not be statistically significant in this example. It only seems that way because the person is post hoc recognizing a pattern.
In scenario two a person that claims to be a psychic predicts that when the button is pressed all the digits will be even numbers. What is the likelihood of this prediction being accurate? It is approximately* 0.000000000000095% (100 divided by 5^20). The button is pressed and the machine produces the sequence "62280648864440284662".
The prediction was correct. Is this a statistically significant occurrence? Yes. The machine produced an unlikely result that matched with an outside event that was directly related to the button being pushed. The chance of this prediction coming true is approximately* one million times more likely than the number sequence "44444444444444444444" appearing. In fact this prediction was one hundred thousand times more likely than any sequence where all the digits are all the same appearing.
At first glance scenario two was approximately* one million times more likely to occur but was in reality much more statistically significant because of one simple difference: in scenario one the coincidence was noticed because of post hoc pattern recognition where in scenario two the coincidence was noticed because The result matched with an outside event that was directly related to the button being pushed (This outside event being the proclaimed psychic's prediction)
Do you understand why this is important? The occurrence in scenario one seems one million times less likely but is in fact not statistically significant at all but the seemingly more likely scenario two is in fact much more statistically significant. Do you understand why this is the case? If not please say so. If you do then I can give you an example of how this same exact concept might apply in daily life to give the illusion of a statistically significant occurrence where no significance actually exists.
*The word 'approximately' in this post translates as "Rounded to within a less than 5% margin of error".
Created:
-->
@Vaarka
I'm glad you tried
The same way you tried on your GFs bra and skirt?
Hmm... No. No good at all. Too obvious, no real substance, too generalized and not personal enough at all. It even feels a bit forced to me despite playing it off of your own wording of your post.
No... I apologize for that bra and skirt comment Vaarka. That was just bad. You deserve better. You deserve to be insulted better. Please forgive me.
Edit: Unless you are a kilt-wearing Scotsman, in which case the skirt comment might hit home and I shouldn't apoligize at all. Pretty sure you aren't a kilt-wearing Scotsman though.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Outplayz
Do i think the supernatural ones are more likely? I really don't know.
You do think the supernatural explination is more likely though, or at least you said you do. Have you changed your mind about that between post 58 and now?
To me it blows my mind that i've basically won four lotteries bc for these experience to have happened exactly how they did is mind blowing rare.
That seems to be a fundamental misunderstanding of how statistics works.
If I type a random 20 digit number I might come up with, for example, the number "50165390173904751803", I could also come up with the number "44444444444444444444".
Which of these outcomes is more likely from typing 20 completely random digits? I am not asking what the likelihood of each is, just which is more likely.
(If your name is not Outplayz then this question is not directed at you. Please do not answer until after Outplayz has answered.)
Created:
-->
@keithprosser
Let me check...is there anyone here who would not use a transporter? If not, why not?
Aw, hell with that. Transporters kick ass. I would love to have a transporter.
Created:
-->
@keithprosser
Correct... athough I don't think they ever call the process teleporting either except possibly once or twice in Star Trek: Enterprise just because in that series the technology is relatively new in-universe.
Created:
-->
@Vaarka
Looking forward to it lmao
I'm sorry, I got nothing. I really can't think of anything better than slyly insinuating you are a cross-dresser in some way and that just feels too easy.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TwoMan
Unless you are hitchhiking around the galaxy, why would you ask that?
I may not be hitchhiking now, but I may in the future. Doesn't hurt to be prepared, and knowing the ultimate question may help me to know how many towels I should bring.
Wait... is that... no, it can't be...
Created:
-->
@keithprosser
It isn't a teleporter.
It's a transporter.
You damn nerd...
Created:
Posted in:
You guys figure out the question to the answer "fourty-two" yet?
Created:
Also is this one of the first posts I've made in like two months? lmao
It seems so, which is why I am trying to think of a clever smartass remark to make.
Hmmm...
I'll get back to you on that in a few hours.
Created:
Posted in:
Oh, good to have you back PW. Mopac has been trying to tale up the slack on the whole projection game of "anyone that isn't religious must want all religious people to die horrible deaths" but he isn't as good at it as you are.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@IlDiavolo
No. I'm saying that a specimen like an alligator has different "genetic information" than a bird. According to the article I provided, the alligator doesn't have the genetic information to develope feathers, that is why the scientists couldn't induce scales to become feathers. It's clear to me that the physical characteristics of a specimen are contained in the DNA, in this sense the DNA contains "information". Don't you agree?
This "information" is a string of molecules attached to eachother creating one larger molecule called a DNA molecule.
For example the binary sequence "10011001 11010010 00111001 10000100 00111001" contains information.
In the same way the DNA sequence "AAGCGTCGAAGCTGGGGCTGAATACCATAAAGG" contains information. Each letter here is a molecule that is part of the DNA chain.
So, how can we tell which DNA molecules contain more information and which contain less?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Outplayz
Now i have critically thought of all of these experiences, and they all have natural explanations. But in my opinion, the natural explanations are a little more far fetched than what i've actually experienced. You have to take it for what it is... a big who knows. Since i can't control any of this. Another thing, each experience is a different strength. What i mean by that is the coincidence that needed to happen in order for it to happen. The last one, friend dying by gangsters i would categorize as a weaker experience, where the other three in my older ages i would categorize as strong. I've really thought this through and all i can tell you is there are things that happen, or seem to happen, that break the rules of what we know "today." Who knows if in the future we figure out these things are just as natural as a germ virus, but i'm quite confident they happen. And there theme points towards another reality that we can't see with intelligent entities.
I am glad you acknowledge the possibility of a natural explanation for the things that happened, for example the possibility that with the experience of you being warned against encountering evil forces during meditation perhaps this warning subconsciously stuck in your head and influenced your experience. I get the impression that you think the supernatural explanation is more likely though. Do you think it would be possible to put a number on just how likely said natural explanations might be compared to yours or do you think your description of them as 'weak experiences' or 'strong experiences' is as detailed as you can get?
Created: