datashow

So none of those great welfare countries gives a duck? Only the despicable USA cares those useless customer goods innovation. Good explanation.

My question is "why not any of those places become the innovation engine of the world". I didn't even mention Australia.

But no color, and no real gray scale.

OK. Then why not any of those places become the innovation engine of the world? I heard people would become more creative and innovative under those circumstances.

Critical Care Beds Per Capita

8 vs 34.7

https://www.forbes.com/sites/niallmccarthy/2020/03/12/the-co...

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00134-012-2627-8

He thought the stores could easily restock, and he would profit from online sale. Possible?

"First" does not equal to "cause" either.

Because there are already too much info on Twitter. No?

I meant random accounts. Friends are definitely not bots, no?

Why would I follow someone with only 73 followers in the first place?

I wish twitter can let me choose to filter out any information from accounts with less than 10000 followers, with exception of my own followings.

Climate change is real doesn't mean NYC will be flooded.

beyond very basic hanging fruit like eliminating monogenic diseases etc.

So it does work.

"geneticists today rightly treat eugenics as a laughable proposition"? Really? This author is not qualified to speak for geneticists.

Dawkins: It’s one thing to deplore eugenics on ideological, political, moral grounds. It’s quite another to conclude that it wouldn’t work in practice. Of course it would. It works for cows, horses, pigs, dogs & roses. Why on earth wouldn’t it work for humans? Facts ignore ideology.

https://mobile.twitter.com/richarddawkins/status/12289436869...

Crazy woke activitists like this author is not qualified to speak for science. They think if something is politically wrong must also be scientifically wrong. It is not.

Actually this event may also become a test of the validity of those measures / indicators. One may argue those measures / indicators are not setup for this purpose.

Update: https://twitter.com/tony_zy/status/1236441004133277702

https://twitter.com/onlyyoontv/status/1236653943616188417

Something is wrong with the "Plots" tab. Two plots show different data points, without title, but comes with same legends. And the legend does not make much sense either. "Mainland China" and "Other Locations" make sense, but "Total Recovered" as the third group? I don't understand this.

Good point. UBI may change the way of life dramatically.

This issue is not a "flaw". It's a root problem. We want to know the effect of permanent UBI, not of a temporary one, and we know (strongly suspect) the effect will be different.

Maybe the simple solution is that the researchers establish a dedicated million dollar bank account for a participant and automatically withdraw $1000 for the participant every month.

If China did not hide their numbers, the rest of the world would have taken it seriously earlier?

Not at the same time.

So if a driver works on both Uber and Lyft or whatever, the driver is an employee of all those companies?

There was a tiny difference detected with millions of observations. But it has no scientific meaning.

Thanks. Good to know.

cognitive science is a unique field, it is somewhat related to psychology, but definitely not a subfield of psychology.

This is a crappy psychology study where none of the researchers is a psychologist. PNAS is a big name in medical science (?), but an unimportant journal in psychology.

There's no serious psychology journal going to publish this kind of stuff. Why? The first problem is measurement. What is the reliability of using positive/negative words to determine positive/negative emotional state? 70%? 80%?

The effect size of this study is 0.001, which would be way way way smaller than the measurement error. LOL. What a laughable "study".

I had the same experience. It started great when you just want a simple line chart, but when you need more and more features, it will be like creating tons of abstractions and writing a whole charting library ...

There is a reason for this common practice. Do researchers pay office spaces, internet, electricity, utilities, etc...? No. So there is overhead.

None of you said has anything relevant to support the claim that racism and bigotry against LGBT is prevalent in Tulsa.

Another perspective: most people in those towns live just fine with the lack of walkability or public transportation.

"Racism and bigotry against LGBT folks is less common than it once was, but it's still prevalent".

"prevalent"? Like how? I think you are making up. Still exist? Definitely yes. Prevalent? No way. Unless you have a very different kind sense of "prevalent".

Actually people in small towns in general are much nicer than big cities and usually they don't care about your skin color or whatever. And they in general appreciate "a slight countercultural bent", unless you have a different sense of "slight".