NLips

My apologies regarding the Florida study; I only intended to address the references you had to UK ballots, given the context of this thread.

On the Florida study. Perhaps I've misunderstood, but it read to me like the punchcard system was worst, followed by ballots scanned by a computer at the precinct, then "other", which is the two counties using other system that sound quite different to each other. It wasn't clear to me at all that they had any sort of rating of how many inadvertently spoiled ballots came from hand written, hand counted systems vs others. I'll readily admit that I'm not any kind of statistics expert though, so the study wasn't straightforward for me to follow.

https://www.rtings.com/ provide frequency response graphs for reviewed headphones + in-ear phones. For headphones they measure against a dummy head and against 5 individuals. They then show variation between these readings, and show the average freq responses.

Factor of 10 failure: 28,500 infections, 57 deaths

All of those spoilt ballot examples are where the proportion of spoiled ballots is high because voters are protesting. They don’t combat the claim that inadvertently spoiled ballots are rare, nor that spoiled ballots open to the possibility of fraud.

BBC’s _More or Less_ did a bit on this. 70% more deadly (per person) would actually be better than 70% more infectious. Deaths increase linearly with deadliness of virus, but they increase exponentially with infectiousness.

Say the current mortality rate is 2% and each infected person passes on the disease to one other after a week, then stops being infectious. If 100 people have the virus in week 0, after 10 weeks 1000 people will have had the virus and 20 will have died.

Increase the death rate by 70% and you’d have 34 deaths instead. Increase the transmission rate by 70%, and you’d have 170 people newly infected in week 1, then 289 in week 2, totalling 285,000 infected people, of which 2% die. That’s now 570 deaths.

Obviously the numbers can all be changed somewhat depending on treatment, or whether you expect everyone to be infected at some point anyway, but the takeaway is that more deadly is not necessarily worse than more infectious.

Treated in Germany, not the UK

I’ll throw one thing out there in case you’ve not tried it: I’ve seen plenty of advice that if your kids wake up “too early”, then counterintuitively, they may be going to sleep too late. So in your case, it’s possible that if you get them to bed two hours earlier, they’ll just wake up earlier. However, getting them to bed several hours earlier might work better. Ours are almost-3 and 5 and both sleep ~12 hours, but if they go to bed late will probably wake up early and things go to pot.

That said, I’ve zero idea how to switch sleep modes, sorry.

Our lifesaver was “healthy sleep habits, happy child” by Mark Weissbluth.

I have never been on a busy motorway with everyone driving at or above the speed limit. Car drivers always vary between 55 and 70(+), and heavier vehicles are frequently as slow as 50. That is not a hazard. It would be a hazard were they to drive in the wrong lane, or fail to merge, but that’s a totally separate issue to the steady-state-avoid-speed-cameras which I was replying to.

My suggestion for someone having difficulty keeping their speed in a 20% window was to aim 6 mph slower at highway speeds. That doesn’t constitute “far slower”.

In the Uk, if you are incapable of handling your car on a highway with other vehicles driving 12mph slower than the limit, then you are incapable of driving on highways - some vehicles e.g. HGVs are restricted to these lower speeds.

Ignoring whether it’s “human nature” to vary by that much, the remedy is simple: in a 60mph limit (the clue is in the name), target 54. +/-10% is now 48.6-59.4, instead of 54-66. It’s within the speed limit, and a smaller absolute speed differential between lowest and highest speed.

Similar arguments have been made against average speed cameras on UK motorways - “I’ll have to be entirely focused on the speedo the whole time!”. No, you just drive within the speed limit.

The speed limit is not a target.

The only reasons for needing to reinflate every day should be:

1) using latex inner tubes. They’re lighter, but don’t hold air so well. Fine for racing, impractical for normal use

2) a slow puncture

Please don't be snarky. A better response would have been just your hint:

"You can mirror the board but that doesn't mirror the pinout of components"

I have no idea which is further from a purely pitch adjusted version of the original! The key (no pun intended) takeaway is that virtually all instruments sound different in each key, and just playing higher will sound different to eg recording and adjusting the pitch digitally (or analog-ly).

That’s not quite correct. To perfectly preserve, you’d also need to change the string thickness, tension and weight, which may involve a change of materials, and may not even be possible to retain proportionality between strings. You’d have to change the body of the guitar as well.

Collecting rubber isn’t about adding weight. The teams want to mask the exact tyre wear amount/patterns, which they do by covering the surface with scraps.

<edit> Actually this seems less clear cut than I thought. I'd heard from David Coulthard's commentary that the reason for picking up was to cover the wear from other teams' eyes. A quick search suggests many people believe it's to do with weight. The weight explanation seems odd, since if the officials think the tyres are masking the true weight of the car, they can demand a different set are used for the weigh-in, but I can't find an authorative source either way.

So it may be to do with weight, or it may be to do with hiding tyre wear. </edit>

Yes, it will lead to grade inflation. The important question is: does that matter? Exams already have their flaws such as being far more likely to give a flawed bad grade to someone than a flawed good grade. How much grade inflation would you see purely from eliminating that effect? And that would largely be desirable.

No. The system aimed for no nationwide grade inflation. When it then took a number of private school’s predictions at face value (no alteration if you paid for a small class size), meaning fewer high grades available for other schools. So lots of state schools had across the board drops from previous years.

This UK government did away with most coursework and also with sitting half of the papers in your penultimate year, half the next. Against the guidance of most universities and schools. And setting themselves up for this.

On the whole, students from private schools had significant grade inflation over previous years, often because the predictions were used as-is. This left fewer high grades "available" for state schools (in order to maintain the whole-country numbers).

Yes, the current government reduced or got rid of much coursework and stopped As levels contributing to an A level.

In the previous system, there was more coursework in some subjects (almost always still <50%), thus recognising the abilities of those who don't do so well in exams, and still recognising the abilities of those who are better at exams than coursework. Exams were split over two years, with most of the material studied in year 1 examined in one go in year 1, and material studied in year 2 (building on year 1 material )examined in one go in year 2.

Now there is an almost total reliance on exams, all in one go at the end of the second year.

Hence (partly) the current storm.

Even ranking students isn't a good answer on the individual level.

Imagine there are two schools: A typical small private school, which normally achieves high grades, and a larger state school which normally achieves a broader spread. Normally the highest individual grade is achieved at the private school.

The historic average of the private school might be A-star, A, B, but predictions were A-star, A, A. Rankings are correct to the individuals' abilities. "Actual" or "deserved" standard could be A, A, A or A, A, B.

The state school's top 3 grades are normally A, A, B. This year you have a student who's capable (and likely) to achieve an A*. Teacher predictions for the top three grades are therefore A-star, A, A. Rankings are still correct according to ability.

Across the country the top 6 grades are normally A-star, A, A, A, B, B.

The private school uses the teacher predictions, because it has a small class: A-star, A, A.

We're now left with only A, B, B available to give to the top students at the state school, so the A-star, A, A assessed students are awarded A, B, B. Every one is a downgrade.

But it's OK, because across the country there's no grade inflation.

Not really - the second half is just rhetoric to add flavour. He wasn't saying "People have had enough of the subset of experts who are always wrong", not least because obviously an "expert" who is always wrong is unwanted.

Yes. Holding interviews at each of Oxford and Cambridge are approximately 2 weeks of full time work for tutors, with paid full-time assistance from some students, and with admin from other college and university staff.

Fascinating! Thanks

My uneducated guess is that the Europeans lived in much larger communities (in Europe), which is a much better breeding ground for disease. This meant they were much more full of disease than the native Americans.

Another uneducated guess is that this is why your pet <insert species name here> doesn't often get sick - they have much less contact with other <insert species name here>s than you do with other humans, contributing to less and slower spread of disease.

Please could a pathologist jump in and enlighten me?

That’s a terrible talk! In particular, why on earth is the car seat moving forwards in the crash test? Most car seats I’ve seen are essentially bolted to the rest of the seat. Is this a Europe / USA thing?

Don't think about approaching. There's nothing you can do if you're next to them that you can't do at a distance. In particular, you should never try to physically stop someone jumping (who is already on an edge). Given that, you may as well keep your distance anyway. The most important thing is to listen.

I think the parent may just be suggesting that there's no need for the LLC wrapper, because it wouldn't hypothetically provide protection anyway.

I believe the parent isn't disagreeing with you.

Breaking down the parent's post:

""" What's funny about this is that I think this is a legitimate and relatively non-evil use case. """ - parent is saying that fingerprinting so the advertisers know who saw the ads is legitimate and relatively non-evil.

It all comes down to lack of transparency/oversight and the option to exercise control as an individual. """ - parent acknowledges that not telling the user and not making it configurable can be problematic.

Please keep calm - there's no need to shout. If for no other reason, it's harder to read all caps.

We are not making the point you think we are.

We're all clear that if the bank can distinguish, they must refund legitimate cases, but that's not what we're trying to explain either. Responding to your last paragraph alone:

"I was talking about cases where the bank is not able to distinguish an actually fraudulent transaction from a legitimate one. Your response "but if they are able to distinguish them, they have to refund you!11" is just completely irrelevant to the point that I was making."

My response is not "if they are able to distinguish them, they have to refund you". It is "if they are _not_ able to distinguish them, they have to refund you".