Jump to content

Laxtonto

Burnt Ends
  • Posts

    5792
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Posts posted by Laxtonto

  1. IS-K is going to be my guess. What will make this weird is that the standard Russian response would be to drop a ton of troops into that region and slaughter everyone, but there is not enough manpower or equipment to do so without pulling parts of it out of Ukraine.

     

    So if this is a “false flag” it would be odd to try to steer it towards the IS-K unless the entire goal is to use it as an exit strategy on Ukraine by saying we are stopping our annexation here as we have achieved our “de-nazification” objective and have annexed all parts that are significantly Russian…

     

    If it is IS-K and not a false flag then things will get real complicated as what is a valid Russian response? How do you mobilize the troops (which they probably want) but then have to find out how to do the logistics and supply to support this 2nd active operation without being able to also strip troops from Chechnya?

    • Hook 'Em 1
  2. 33 minutes ago, JohnnyRage said:

    That’s a lot of words for, “who could know?”

    That’s a lot of words to say “these numbers are full of shit” and so if you want a real number go find a legitimate source on the ground or worse case dissect the IDF numbers and then probably work out a multiplier for it.

    • Hook 'Em 1
  3. 26 minutes ago, JohnnyRage said:

    Give us your numbers then @statsman.

    Lets make this a little easier. It doesn't matter where values come from, there will be always variation in a set of collected numbers. The more complex the system, the greater the likelihood of significant variations. In this case, we don't have any significant variations. How is that possible? This is actually how a vast majority of in-house fraud is caught in production processes. People know what the outcome data "should" look like, but don't know enough about the input processes to really make believable fake underlying data.

    The numbers are obviously manipulated because they are "too perfect". Lets start with aggregate data and then go from there.  Instead of having some days that there are huge spikes and other days with little loss of life (ie a major battle one day and then the IDF pulling back to regroup the next or bombing a market one day and not the next), the daily loss of life was 270+- 15% or a range of 230 - 311 . Where are the peaks and valleys in the data? Any form of casualty data of civilian populations will have a significantly greater spread than what is being portrayed. As an example, the war(s) in the Balkans showed massive variation in civilian losses on a daily (and even weekly) basis.  Where are the outliers here? We should be seeing days of 400-500 and days of 50-100, not an almost perfect set of data confined to a set of boundary criteria with a mean of 270.

    Then you fall into the issue that the number of children casualties is not tied to the number of women casualties. How is that possible in this type of indiscriminate bombing? Then the number of women killed is strongly negatively related to the number of male casualties. So when men die in combat that day, then the daily reporting of female losses goes down predictably. But yet the loss of the children remains unrelated to the men. In what scenario is that logically possible? Then you get to the weird data artifacts like when the few days that male losses were at or close to 0,  the female death toll for the day skyrockets (while the children casualty figures remained steady those days). How does that play out in a combat scenario?

    This data was being generated not reported, with a specific daily number in mind. More than likely they decided that the daily losses should be approximately 70% women and children and 30% males. So they did some type of random assignment and went from there. Once they had a women and children number, they then subtracted that off from the random number selected from the 230-311 "expected" casualty figure and then took out the women and children to get the males.  Those steps would mirror the weird artifacts in the data.

     

    So what are the real numbers? Who knows. All I can tell you is that these values are obviously manipulated.

     

  4. 3 hours ago, statsman said:

    WRT reported Gazan casualty- we know that Hamas reports are not anything to put faith in. We also know that any loss of innocent civilian life is a tragedy. That said, Abraham Wyner, a stats prof at Wharton, took a look at the casualty numbers reported by Hamas and explains why they’re probably all made up. 
     
    https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/how-gaza-health-ministry-fakes-casualty-numbers

    This is not to downplay the humanitarian tragedy, but to shed light on subjective assessments of Israel’s methods of urban warfare. 

    I saw that yesterday. It is humorous to see how poorly they faked the data. Looks like something one of my undergrads would do.

    If you are going to make up numbers you have to understand 2 major things. 1. the dynamic relationships of the system components and the concept of variation.

    • Drool 1
  5. At this point, how does Wade stay on as special prosecutor with the potential issues of him misusing his IOLTA to hide earned income from his wife in his divorce proceedings, and how that is tied to potential tax evasion? That is a pretty damning accusation from a variety of fronts. If any of that is true he is going to be tied up in all sorts of ethics probes and a liability during the proceedings.

    To me, that is something that is much more tangible and black and white that may lead to a major delay in all of this instead of the continued grind back and forth about potential conflicts of interest, which now is a coin-flip based on trying to obfuscate something that most likely may have led to a simple admonishment by the court or some set of cursory additional guidelines to guarantee the autonomy of the special prosecutor due to their relationship.  

    The other side is always going to go over everything looking for something to use to their advantage. This is standard procedure for major crime and civil cases now and it shouldn't be a shock to anyone. That is the job. You would be disappointed if your lawyers did not do everything in their power to make sure you did not get found guilty. 

    The expectation is always going to be that the state should appear to be squeaky clean and the defense will look to do everything in its power to make sure that first, the case never makes it to trial, then second, to have the trial once started dismissed for any possible reason (either through legal brilliance or frivolous technicalities) and then third win the case on its merits in the courtroom, and then fourth appeal and drag out any guilty verdict as long as possible. Now there is enough smoke to have people question if the state is squeaky clean or if is there something else going on.  It might not be "fair" to put the system or the State on trial beforehand, but that is the world we live in. People want to blame Trump or the judge for entertaining this, but it looks like the first domino in all of this is Wade trying to screw over his now ex-wife in his divorce proceedings. If that is true, he is probably out as a special prosecutor and prepare for all sorts of delays and additional hearings over all of this to eat into the timeline.

    Welcome to the big leagues.

    • Hook 'Em 3
  6. Just now, immamac said:

    Yeah I am thinking of how we want that to work. I kinda want to ditch that chat entirely and just make a plugin that allows for the chat to be the thread. 

    The question is really going to be how does it work from your side to be able to interact with the fuckery in chat during the live stream. If it is integrate in the chat platform then it rolls into the viewer interaction aspects of the stream. If it is segmented then it is posts housed here, which is cool, but not if it adds another layer of pain in the ass for you

  7. 18 minutes ago, 52-80 said:

    Lol this woman is an assistant professor at UTa, and this is about all she has her name to. 
     

    who cares? valid question. its not criminal and dont make shit to 99.9% of the world. If you are affiliated with the university, this is hugely embarrassing conduct

    IMG_4944.jpeg

    What does piss me off is that my publication history destroys that but UTA would never hire me. Applied to UTA many times and not even a courtesy conference interview from UTA...

    Politics in academia are weird...

     

    Maybe I need to set up a thread on the nerds board about coming up with a set of Surly led articles, just for the fuck of it..

    • Hook 'Em 1
  8. 1 hour ago, huge said:

    Is this another reason that college tuition has increased at 10x inflation?  

    State and Federal funding has dropped from 40% to less than 10% for most schools and yet the state and fed has mandated a massive bloat in required staff to be viable for the students to receive financial aid.

    So for your students to have the privilege to get gouged on student loans, they had to double the administrative staff and yet still cut everyone funding... There are virtually no offsets and so instead all of the costs go right to the cost of tuition.

    • Hook 'Em 7
    • Like 1
    • Rage+1 1
  9. I am somewhat jaded in my viewpoints in this area because I am an Associate Editor of a reputable journal. Also, I do most of my research either in Business or Industrial Engineering journals.  

     

    When it comes to journals, there are no rules about journals only rules about if the journal counts as "quality" for the tenure process.

    Is it backed by a major publisher (Elsevier, Emerald, Wiley. etc)? no...

    Is it backed by a major society (CCSMP, OR Society, etc)? no...

    Since its title supply chain, is it listed in the ABDC list?  no...

    Is it Cablles listed at all? no....

    In this case it would not be considered a viable journal for most business schools in Texas for tenure.

     

    So now is it considered a predatory journal or is it just a bullshit journal housed by the university? Looking through it and checking on the various journal ranking groups, it isn't cosidered predatory (ie pay for play) so it is obvious just a small inhouse journal that is used to help push recognition for the college or program.

    What is funnier to me in their call for papers is this:

    Quote

    Dr. Erick Jones Jr., University of texas at Austin, United States of America

    If you cant get UT right in the boilerplate...

     

    • Hook 'Em 4
    • Like 1
×
×
  • Create New...