Nah. You're not adding any information or insight with your back and forth. That's what you miss. You might also be more interested in the PhD thesis I submitt

Nah. You're not adding any information or insight with your back and forth. That's what you miss. You might also be more interested in the PhD thesis I submitted on multi-touch user interfaces, adjacent. or: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4707742 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4707742 http://flowingdata.com/2009/02/25/googles-chief-economist-hal-varian-on-statistics-and-data/ http://flowingdata.com/2009/02/25/googles-chief-economist-ha... But nice try at the smear. Orthogonal Datapoint: S&P guilty of misleading investors Landmark ruling by Australian court could pave way for flood of cases against ratings agencies http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2012/nov/05/standard-poors-guilty-misleading-investors http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2012/nov/05/standard-poor... http://www.cnn.com/2012/11/05/business/sp-guilt-misleading-investors/ http://www.cnn.com/2012/11/05/business/sp-guilt-misleading-i... Dressing up ideas with statistics is not new, original, or scientific, etc. Its just an informed, iterative marketing strategy. In business or politics. The level (AAA!) and quality of the "analysis" notwithstanding.[1] _______ [1] Its worth noting the ~epistemological assymetry of ratings. They are so "objective" and "reliable" that their use is legally mandated, in the US and the EU. But the providers ratings themselves issue them as "non-expert" "public opinions". Thus, they cannot be sued if you rely on them. We'll see how far the Australian precedent goes, internationally. Until then, Caveat Emptor.