easychewie
Joined 10 years ago
Karma
8
Submissions
13
Member since
Nov 3
Recent submissions
Comment · 9 years ago
I don't agree with the author. With a few notable exceptions, these tend to be truisms in my experience.
Comment · 9 years ago
1. Leadership is male.
2. Women are better leaders when they look and act like men.
3. A successful public life interferes in a woman’s private life.
4. When women get emotionally involved, they lose rational thought, and their leadership capacity fails them.
I couldn't agree more.
Comment · 9 years ago
Why? Does age somehow imply truth value?
Comment · 9 years ago
Agreed! Which is why I stated that I think scenario #2 is the correct one, and we don't in fact have a legitimate case of survivor bias. Remember, this discussion began when I said I do it safely. The charge was made that this is survivor bias. By putting numbers to it, I think it becomes clear that the determining factor is not my bias but real, quantifiable safety.
Comment · 9 years ago
You can't just say "survivor bias" and think you have a solid argument. Let's examine your objection more critically.
I mentioned I'd carried every day since 2006. Suppose this isn't quite true, and I've only carried 330 days per year (this is too low, but still). Further, we just started 2017, and I started carrying in August 2006. This means I've carried roughly 3,437 days. If my carrying a Glock on any given day is as high as 99.9% safe (i.e., I have a 0.01% chance of a negligent discharge), then I should have a "survival" probability of only 3.2%. If my daily safety probability drops to only 99.7%, my probability of getting to now with no ND is 0.0%. Decreasing my daily safety probability to only 99% means my probability of no ND is 9.95e-14.
Now think about what this means. Either:
1. Carrying a Glock is very unsafe, and I'm incredibly lucky. In this case your claim of survivor bias would be warranted (assuming there weren't many others like me, which there are).
2. Carrying a Glock is very safe, and the chances of an ND are substantially less than 0.01% per day, in which case the charge of survivor bias is unwarranted.
It strikes me that #2 is the clear winner here.
Comment · 9 years ago
Dude. I've been daily carrying a Glock since 2006, never had a negligent discharge.
Comment · 9 years ago
> First I'll add the disclaimer that this is my personal opinion. I'm not speaking for anyone other than myself.
And there it is. One of many reasons I'll never work for the government again. The government is so PC-sensitive that dude can't even post on HN without a mildly disguised form of legalese. When I was in the Air Force, everything I said had to be prefaced with
The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the Air force, Department of Defense, or the U.S. Government.
One might think this is a minor complaint but after years of death by 1,000 cuts, you just can't take it anymore.
Comment · 9 years ago
Serious question: if Manning thought he was a rabbit, how many people would refer to him as one?
Comment · 10 years ago
See previous work by Munroe: https://www.xkcd.com/1138/
Comment · 10 years ago
The idea is to not change the window size at all from the default. If this advice is followed, you minimize the possible information leak. In your example, 1583x1176 tells us that your system is capable of rendering at least that size. Given the unusual numbers, we further suspect you're not maximized on a system capable of an 1176px tall browser (much fewer of those than 1920x1080). While not uniquely identifying, it's a piece of the puzzle.
Comment · 10 years ago
> fullscreen Tor browser
Tor recommends not going full-screen, since window size can be used as one of several identifiers.
Comment · 10 years ago
Comment · 10 years ago
Even though many people see "guys" as a harmless, genderless word, not everybody does. You can think of the opposite word to guys (for example: gals or girls) and wonder if a group of men would feel comfortable being referred to as girls. When someone refers to you using a word that you don’t identify with, it's easy to feel excluded from conversation or misidentified.
Good grief. What a bunch of girls.