2×7 days left to take down Trump.
-
Hillarity ensued ;P
DURA LEX, SED LEX GCS d--- s-/++ a- C++++ U+++ P- L- E-- W++ N++ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t++ 5? X R++ tv-- b+ DI+++ D++ G e++>+++ h--- ++>+++ y+++* Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X If you think 'goto' is evil, try writing an Assembly program without JMP. -- TNCaver When I was six, there were no ones and zeroes - only zeroes. And not all of them worked. -- Ravi Bhavnani
:laugh: That it did!
"the debugger doesn't tell me anything because this code compiles just fine" - random QA comment "Facebook is where you tell lies to your friends. Twitter is where you tell the truth to strangers." - chriselst "I don't drink any more... then again, I don't drink any less." - Mike Mullikins uncle
-
You hit the jackpot. But too late except choosing from the remaining two candidates. And I'm supporting Hillary.
The best way to make your dreams come true is to wake up. Paul Valery
-
Stephen Gonzalez wrote:
And I'm supporting Hillary.
Now, if only you could explain why. But no, you can't, because you are a puppet.
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
Shouldn't you suppose to stop commenting on this thread. Weren't you complaining about my soapbox comment. Re: 2×7 days left to take down Trump.[^]. I only speak man who wore pant not diaper.
The best way to make your dreams come true is to wake up. Paul Valery
-
Shouldn't you suppose to stop commenting on this thread. Weren't you complaining about my soapbox comment. Re: 2×7 days left to take down Trump.[^]. I only speak man who wore pant not diaper.
The best way to make your dreams come true is to wake up. Paul Valery
Stephen Gonzalez wrote:
Shouldn't you suppose to stop commenting on this thread.
Just waiting for you to support what you are saying. So, will you answer? Why are you supporting Hellary?
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
-
Stephen Gonzalez wrote:
Shouldn't you suppose to stop commenting on this thread.
Just waiting for you to support what you are saying. So, will you answer? Why are you supporting Hellary?
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
Unlike Trump, she is not racist.
The best way to make your dreams come true is to wake up. Paul Valery
-
Unlike Trump, she is not racist.
The best way to make your dreams come true is to wake up. Paul Valery
-
Stephen Gonzalez wrote:
Unlike Trump, she is not racist.
OK. Back that up. What has Trump ever said or done to indicate that he is racist?
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
Go and figure it out yourself. It's all over the Internet.
The best way to make your dreams come true is to wake up. Paul Valery
-
Go and figure it out yourself. It's all over the Internet.
The best way to make your dreams come true is to wake up. Paul Valery
Stephen Gonzalez wrote:
Go and figure it out yourself. It's all over the Internet.
Ya, I didn't think you would be able to back up anything you say. The only thing on the internet (which is a lousy resource by the way) was when Trump said Mexico was sending the worst to us. Is that what makes you think he is racist?
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
-
Stephen Gonzalez wrote:
Go and figure it out yourself. It's all over the Internet.
Ya, I didn't think you would be able to back up anything you say. The only thing on the internet (which is a lousy resource by the way) was when Trump said Mexico was sending the worst to us. Is that what makes you think he is racist?
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
Like I said Google and find out what and where he said. You just Trump Puppet.
The best way to make your dreams come true is to wake up. Paul Valery
-
Like I said Google and find out what and where he said. You just Trump Puppet.
The best way to make your dreams come true is to wake up. Paul Valery
Stephen Gonzalez wrote:
Like I said Google and find out what and where he said.
I did. And there is nothing actually racist. There is a lot that the media is claiming is racist, but if you actually see what he said, it is not racist at all. Until you can provide one single thing to backup your claims, you are ironically the ultimate puppet you keep trying to deflect from. :laugh: :laugh:
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
-
Stephen Gonzalez wrote:
Like I said Google and find out what and where he said.
I did. And there is nothing actually racist. There is a lot that the media is claiming is racist, but if you actually see what he said, it is not racist at all. Until you can provide one single thing to backup your claims, you are ironically the ultimate puppet you keep trying to deflect from. :laugh: :laugh:
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
Denying is one of characteristic of Trump Puppet. :laugh:
The best way to make your dreams come true is to wake up. Paul Valery
-
Never trust polls... the Shy Trumps will catch you out Just like the Shy Brexiteers cuaght people out.
WiganLatics wrote:
Never trust polls... the Shy Trumps will catch you out
Actually, its not that you "can't trust" them, you just have to look at the "Science" behind them. Some will sample dispersed subsets appropriately, some won't for self interest. Some will normalize appropriately, some won't for self interest. Some will take sample enough of a size, some won't for self interest. The list goes on and on. The thing is, each of these can be OK to disregard on their own in some stat samples. It just depends on what data you are looking for, for which data sets you can use. With that, you can also control the outcome. That is in fact exactly how stats works. Shrinking the size enough and manipulating the normalizing factor SHOULD give you specific results that you expect, else math is failing your system. This does NOT however mean you can't trust stats, it just means you have to look at what the sample set normalized on, how big it is, how they dispersed it etc. etc. etc and they use the sample set to draw your own conclusion. But I digress, many media poll sets are simple used for propaganda. We knew this all along, but the recent Wiki leaks proves it but those that are so drained into media don't even seem to care. Both SIDEs have been manipulated. The DNC has rigged it using propoganda and media to infalte Trump at their convenience. They completely punked him into thinking he had half the support. The thing is the DNC never had the support either. So they punked themselves. I think third party support is at a massive high and they are just being really good at hiding it.
Computers have been intelligent for a long time now. It just so happens that the program writers are about as effective as a room full of monkeys trying to crank out a copy of Hamlet. The interesting thing about software is it can not reproduce, until it can.
-
WiganLatics wrote:
Never trust polls... the Shy Trumps will catch you out
Actually, its not that you "can't trust" them, you just have to look at the "Science" behind them. Some will sample dispersed subsets appropriately, some won't for self interest. Some will normalize appropriately, some won't for self interest. Some will take sample enough of a size, some won't for self interest. The list goes on and on. The thing is, each of these can be OK to disregard on their own in some stat samples. It just depends on what data you are looking for, for which data sets you can use. With that, you can also control the outcome. That is in fact exactly how stats works. Shrinking the size enough and manipulating the normalizing factor SHOULD give you specific results that you expect, else math is failing your system. This does NOT however mean you can't trust stats, it just means you have to look at what the sample set normalized on, how big it is, how they dispersed it etc. etc. etc and they use the sample set to draw your own conclusion. But I digress, many media poll sets are simple used for propaganda. We knew this all along, but the recent Wiki leaks proves it but those that are so drained into media don't even seem to care. Both SIDEs have been manipulated. The DNC has rigged it using propoganda and media to infalte Trump at their convenience. They completely punked him into thinking he had half the support. The thing is the DNC never had the support either. So they punked themselves. I think third party support is at a massive high and they are just being really good at hiding it.
Computers have been intelligent for a long time now. It just so happens that the program writers are about as effective as a room full of monkeys trying to crank out a copy of Hamlet. The interesting thing about software is it can not reproduce, until it can.
Just adding on that the sample size also effects the margin of error and that any statistics with a sample size less than one thousand has a margin or error too large to be considered a reliable representation of the population. In regards to this election, there are rumors that the large polls (e.g. CNN and the like) are leaving out the results for entire sections of the demographic, such as the 35 and under voters. When I say rumors, I have seen some documents but nothing on the internet can be trusted until after November 8th.
if (Object.DividedByZero == true) { Universe.Implode(); } Meus ratio ex fortis machina. Simplicitatis de formae ac munus. -Foothill, 2016
-
Denying is one of characteristic of Trump Puppet. :laugh:
The best way to make your dreams come true is to wake up. Paul Valery
Let me end this thread; to be human, is to be an entity that uses generalization to make sense of the world, meaning that to be human is to be racist. That does not mean that you should go around and call those, very generalizing, deplorables :laugh:
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^][](X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett)
-
Let me end this thread; to be human, is to be an entity that uses generalization to make sense of the world, meaning that to be human is to be racist. That does not mean that you should go around and call those, very generalizing, deplorables :laugh:
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^][](X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett)
To be human is to be prejudiced. Racism is completely different.
If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack. --Winston Churchill
-
Let me end this thread; to be human, is to be an entity that uses generalization to make sense of the world, meaning that to be human is to be racist. That does not mean that you should go around and call those, very generalizing, deplorables :laugh:
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^][](X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett)
Quote:
to be human is to be racist.
That the dumbest thing I've read so far. Is that how you feel about other race than yours.
The best way to make your dreams come true is to wake up. Paul Valery
-
Quote:
to be human is to be racist.
That the dumbest thing I've read so far. Is that how you feel about other race than yours.
The best way to make your dreams come true is to wake up. Paul Valery
Stephen Gonzalez wrote:
That the dumbest thing I've read so far. Is that how you feel about other race than yours.
I'm not even able to define a race; AFAIK, I'm part homo sapiens, part Neanderthal.
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^][](X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett)
-
To be human is to be prejudiced. Racism is completely different.
If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack. --Winston Churchill
Daniel Pfeffer wrote:
To be human is to be prejudiced. Racism is completely different.
Happens to be what I meant :thumbsup: I should really learn those more complicatered words one day.
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^][](X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett)
-
Stephen Gonzalez wrote:
That the dumbest thing I've read so far. Is that how you feel about other race than yours.
I'm not even able to define a race; AFAIK, I'm part homo sapiens, part Neanderthal.
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^][](X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett)
Quote:
Let me end this thread; to be human, is to be an entity that uses generalization to make sense of the world, meaning that to be human is to be racist.
What is your point then ?
The best way to make your dreams come true is to wake up. Paul Valery
-
Just adding on that the sample size also effects the margin of error and that any statistics with a sample size less than one thousand has a margin or error too large to be considered a reliable representation of the population. In regards to this election, there are rumors that the large polls (e.g. CNN and the like) are leaving out the results for entire sections of the demographic, such as the 35 and under voters. When I say rumors, I have seen some documents but nothing on the internet can be trusted until after November 8th.
if (Object.DividedByZero == true) { Universe.Implode(); } Meus ratio ex fortis machina. Simplicitatis de formae ac munus. -Foothill, 2016
Foothill wrote:
Just adding on that the sample size also effects the margin of error and that any statistics with a sample size less than one thousand has a margin or error too large to be considered a reliable representation of the population.
Yeah, I think they honestly outright lie with their margin of error or are just really bad at math or really good at doublethink[^] as they sometimes account for things and they sometimes choose not to when it was even more applicable completely skewing what should be the "Margin of error" in fact sometimes their margin of error is as I said, outright manipulation. Its not that its an error, it is more accurately a fixed sample set that the outcome was known prior to the polling, and then the poll was used and claimed had a wrong "Margin of Error" as there was no error, it was set to be that outcome.
Foothill wrote:
In regards to this election, there are rumors that the large polls (e.g. CNN and the like) are leaving out the results for entire sections of the demographic, such as the 35 and under voters.
This is why I think third party is far more powerful that being stated. It seemed prior to the convention that they were all clearly going Sanders, and I honestly think they did not flip to HRC or Trump. I doubt they went Libertarian as the media likes to claim followed up by a silly Johnson Gaffe and then a bit about how voting Third party is a protest vote and a throw away etc., which then then bundle something in about Jill Stein to associate the thinking to Green. Truth is, she is off the charts yet in younger voters. If nothing I bet Green earns their funding for the next election, but I think it is possible the 270 is hit by neither and there becomes disorder in Congress (both branches)
Computers have been intelligent for a long time now. It just so happens that the program writers are about as effective as a room full of monkeys trying to crank out a copy of Hamlet. The interesting thing about software is it can not reproduce, until it can.