5 ms·

> The only people that believe that internet access is only for the rich, is rich people. > The Net Party ran for elections in 2013 and got 1.2% of the votes

> The only people that believe that internet access is only for the rich, is rich people. > The Net Party ran for elections in 2013 and got 1.2% of the votes in Buenos Aires How do you justify that most of the votes came from wealthy neighborhoods of the city? https://twitter.com/seppo0010/status/578031940651118593 https://twitter.com/seppo0010/status/578031940651118593

santisiri 12y ago
we had votes in every single neighborhood of the city. Our correlation was better with progressive parties (ARI) than conservative (PRO) ones even. Actually in Congress, The Workers Party (PO) brought more users to DemocracyOS than ANY other party.
- seppo0010 12y ago
  I tried to do the math myself about the correlation, but it seems like my statistics teachers would be disappointed[1]. What R^2 did you get compared to ARI and what with PRO? At first sight, it does not seem significant. My claim was about poor and rich people, and you used progressive and conservatives parties as a proxy indicator, which is not great. In USA, for example, California and New York are two of the richest states and they are progressive, while the poorest tend to be conservative. In the "comunas" 4, 8 and 9 (Lugano, Mataderos, Soldati, Pompeya, Barracas) the party "UNION PRO" did better than "UNEN" (a.k.a.: "ARI"), and in the 12, 13, 14 (Urquiza, Belgrano, Palermo) their percentages were really close. If anything, your statement is completely unrelated to my question. > Actually in Congress, The Workers Party (PO) brought more users to DemocracyOS than ANY other party. Correlation does not imply causality. One possible explanation is that both DemocracyOS and PO have a stronger impact on young people. [1] https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1TqWBMk18bbr1TQV-Wq0aRdWpF8SclQBtqjtq3KvHRgQ/edit?usp=sharing https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1TqWBMk18bbr1TQV-Wq0a...
  - santisiri 12y ago
    Yes. We do better in the younger generation. We are building for the future and thinking the long term. and again: only rich people believe internet is for the rich. In every slum you'll find every single kid with a huge smartphone. As you came to realize by the end of your rant: the gap is more generational than Socio-economical. That's why this makes sense in the long term.
    - seppo0010 12y ago
      Rant? Do you really consider I was ranting at any point? I think I've exhibit thoughts, tried to look for mathematical proof, quoted people who are smarter than me, wonder about known problems when making decisions, and you consider that a rant? You have no addressed a single concern I have shared. You don't have to, but your replies are infuriating because you are missing the point every time. You are just repeating marketing phrases like "every single kid with a huge smartphone". Well, what does that prove? Does it prove that internet has as much penetration in lower income population than it does in high income one? I think not. And if you keep repeating that you are just insulting the young people who live in a slum and do not have smartphone, because you are blaming them for not having one. > the gap is more generational than Socio-economical That gap is not related to democracyOS but to technology. You will have a stronger impact on a young generation not because "you are thinking in long term" but because they'll understand it faster. This comment was mostly a rant. And from now on I'll refuse to answer any comment you write until you want to provide something useful to talk about, or even back your statements.
    - santisiri 12y ago
      It just proves that you have never been in a slum from Buenos Aires. And yes, denying a rant with a rant speaks for itself. :)
      - seppo0010 12y ago
        Te respondiste a vos solo, no a mí. Sí he estado, no desde que se popularizaron los smartphones, y mientras hablas de experiencias personales no deja de ser estadísticamente insignificante. Y no, me calenté con tu comentario, antes estaba argumentando, a diferencia de vos que no tuviste un solo arugmento.

santisiri 12y ago

we had votes in every single neighborhood of the city. Our correlation was better with progressive parties (ARI) than conservative (PRO) ones even. Actually in Congress, The Workers Party (PO) brought more users to DemocracyOS than ANY other party.

seppo0010 12y ago
I tried to do the math myself about the correlation, but it seems like my statistics teachers would be disappointed[1]. What R^2 did you get compared to ARI and what with PRO? At first sight, it does not seem significant. My claim was about poor and rich people, and you used progressive and conservatives parties as a proxy indicator, which is not great. In USA, for example, California and New York are two of the richest states and they are progressive, while the poorest tend to be conservative. In the "comunas" 4, 8 and 9 (Lugano, Mataderos, Soldati, Pompeya, Barracas) the party "UNION PRO" did better than "UNEN" (a.k.a.: "ARI"), and in the 12, 13, 14 (Urquiza, Belgrano, Palermo) their percentages were really close. If anything, your statement is completely unrelated to my question. > Actually in Congress, The Workers Party (PO) brought more users to DemocracyOS than ANY other party. Correlation does not imply causality. One possible explanation is that both DemocracyOS and PO have a stronger impact on young people. [1] https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1TqWBMk18bbr1TQV-Wq0aRdWpF8SclQBtqjtq3KvHRgQ/edit?usp=sharing https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1TqWBMk18bbr1TQV-Wq0a...
- santisiri 12y ago
  Yes. We do better in the younger generation. We are building for the future and thinking the long term. and again: only rich people believe internet is for the rich. In every slum you'll find every single kid with a huge smartphone. As you came to realize by the end of your rant: the gap is more generational than Socio-economical. That's why this makes sense in the long term.
  - seppo0010 12y ago
    Rant? Do you really consider I was ranting at any point? I think I've exhibit thoughts, tried to look for mathematical proof, quoted people who are smarter than me, wonder about known problems when making decisions, and you consider that a rant? You have no addressed a single concern I have shared. You don't have to, but your replies are infuriating because you are missing the point every time. You are just repeating marketing phrases like "every single kid with a huge smartphone". Well, what does that prove? Does it prove that internet has as much penetration in lower income population than it does in high income one? I think not. And if you keep repeating that you are just insulting the young people who live in a slum and do not have smartphone, because you are blaming them for not having one. > the gap is more generational than Socio-economical That gap is not related to democracyOS but to technology. You will have a stronger impact on a young generation not because "you are thinking in long term" but because they'll understand it faster. This comment was mostly a rant. And from now on I'll refuse to answer any comment you write until you want to provide something useful to talk about, or even back your statements.
  - santisiri 12y ago
    It just proves that you have never been in a slum from Buenos Aires. And yes, denying a rant with a rant speaks for itself. :)
    - seppo0010 12y ago
      Te respondiste a vos solo, no a mí. Sí he estado, no desde que se popularizaron los smartphones, y mientras hablas de experiencias personales no deja de ser estadísticamente insignificante. Y no, me calenté con tu comentario, antes estaba argumentando, a diferencia de vos que no tuviste un solo arugmento.