DAGdug

6 ms·

31.
by DAGdug 2y ago
What does this mean - could you elaborate on what you mean by ad companies and how they would use voice data?
32.
by DAGdug 2y ago
How you select immigrants would dramatically affect these results, so it makes sense to exclude them. A lot of East and South Asian 2nd gen achievement is due to them being the children of highly skilled immigrants - they’d thrive in almost
33.
by DAGdug 2y ago
I didn’t suggest this makes the argument credible. In fact, I fully expect that it should make one more skeptical of the argument, which is part of the reason I put that in there.
34.
by DAGdug 2y ago
This is idiotic. I lumped Whites and Jews into one category (since there is a subset of Jews that don’t consider themselves white), East and South Asians into another. Read more carefully before you cast aspersions.
35.
by DAGdug 2y ago
Make better policy decisions next time around? (Surprise, surprise, poor kids don’t do zoom classes).
36.
by DAGdug 2y ago
Comment is true of immigrants as a group, but it’s a remarkably heterogeneous pool. When you break immigrants down down into East/South Asians versus White/Jewish versus others, the differences in educational outcomes between thes
37.
by DAGdug 2y ago
The Simpson’s paradox part is factual, and has been known for over a decade courtesy Steve Sailer, who is an immigration restrictionist. A fairer critique of the poster is that they’re unoriginal (rather than that they’re blaming immigrants
38.
by DAGdug 2y ago
It’s the same logic as: when I married, the time to cook each meal doubled. Ugh, no - many things scale vastly sublinearly with the number of kids one has.
39.
by DAGdug 2y ago
And one could argue that: 1. Immigrants typically have higher TFRs that within years wipes out the gains you allude to 2. Productivity depends on how skilled the immigrants are; much of Europe has a large chunk of immigrants with lower pro
40.
by DAGdug 2y ago
That’s fine, but if the immigrants move from the developing to the developed world, that incurs a massive increase in their carbon footprint.
41.
by DAGdug 2y ago
“ And as children get viewed as a selfish luxury” I never quite understood this. Who exactly will pay into social security to benefit the next crop of retirees that seem to think it’s selfish to have kids?
42.
by DAGdug 2y ago
Wonder if Rajat Gupta, the former CEO of McKinsey who was incarcerated for sharing insider information, and the corrupt Gupta family, were connected in any way (they’re from the same inbred trading caste in India, a country that is sadly no
43.
by DAGdug 2y ago
I’d ignore the critique completely - it lacks internal consistency. The similar final result is due to central limit theorem, which is a large n result, and actually lets you ignore the hypergeometric construct and use a binomial instead si
44.
by DAGdug 2y ago
Closer to the mark where? If you aggregate over countries with disproportionately young demographics and questionable reporting, yes! In much of the developed world, during the phase of the pandemic when JI did his reporting, heck no.
45.
by DAGdug 2y ago
As someone who felt the policy reaction to COVID was poor (no balanced assessment of the cost of false positives and negatives in decision-making, poor accounting of uncertainty), I concur that he didn’t apply his usual rigor or his critiqu
46.
by DAGdug 2y ago
Because the state/bureaucracy is actually accountable or transparent about decisions or decision-making frameworks or how they evaluate decision-making frameworks? I’d much rather cut them to a third their size, pay them like they’re i
47.
by DAGdug 2y ago
I actually believe the claim in the study to be true. But it’s also a terrible design - there’s survivorship bias in selecting operational batteries. It’s not clear if you are thinking that much more carefully than the self-made expert, eve
48.
by DAGdug 2y ago
The arms look, er, not very feminine.
49.
by DAGdug 2y ago
This assumes they have no constraint when it comes to supply, and therefore no opportunity cost.
50.
by DAGdug 2y ago
I’ve switched from manager to IC and vice-versa a few times at FAANG. Didn’t strike me as moving between the capitalist and proletariat classes, lol!
51.
by DAGdug 2y ago
Your comment perhaps says more about your own mental state than of those you’re collectively chiding.
52.
by DAGdug 2y ago
“ as they are right now in a similar context” You can be more direct about Israel’s treatment of Palestinians! All it takes for evil to succeed ….
53.
by DAGdug 2y ago
When data and anecdote match, such comments seem unwarranted. Heterodoxy is useless if it isn’t correct. And you haven’t even expressed a clear rebuttal.
54.
by DAGdug 2y ago
There are varying degrees of control over outcomes. The judgment comes from the correlation between an unobserved variable (effort at controlling or preventing obesity) with the observed variable (actual obesity).
55.
by DAGdug 2y ago
Yes, precisely this! I’ve seen more than a few people fired for generating BS analyses that didn’t help their employer, especially in tech where scrutiny is immense when things start to fail.
56.
by DAGdug 2y ago
Maybe in academia, where sketchy incentives rule. In industry, p-hacking is great till you’re eventually caught for doing nonsense that isn’t driving real impact (still, the lead time is enough to mint money).
57.
by DAGdug 2y ago
On speculative things or trivial things, sure! On substantive matters (recall: the choice of words is “overturned”), in empirical realms or theory (physics, CS) or math, it’s rather doubtful. Anonymous, self-declared geniuses aren’t to be t
58.
by DAGdug 2y ago
“ I've overturned the field leader several times in science” Either that makes you a field leader yourself, or you did it for trivial things, or you’re BSing. Which one is it?
59.
by DAGdug 2y ago
Most of the world cares. Like they did when South Africa was merrily apartheid-ing. Only the American establishment doesn’t care, but hopefully that will change with progressives hitting a critical mass.
60.
by DAGdug 2y ago
From the Zionist playbook to term any opposition to their occupation terrorism, and excuse collateral damage. Consistency further demands you support Trump who wanted to penalize families for the actions of individuals. Sorry, collective pu

More ›