Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Repatriation, yeah right. (Score 2) 389

I'd bet it's Leavenworth, assuming they let him live. The guy is now claiming "He was a spy" which means he is admitting to espionage. To me, that makes him no-longer a whistle-blower, but something quite different. He's admitting to being a traitor, which entitles him to a trial on charges that can carry some serious penalties, including death. I'd be surprised if they went for death, given he's still alive.

He is claiming that he was trained and worked as a spy for the US government, not (as you seem to think) that he spied on the US government for a foreign power.

Comment: Re:Not for Nerds (Score 3, Insightful) 253

Perhaps introspection is lacking in that particular decision making process and how playing with statistics and probabilities can lead to wrong decision making especially in modern human society allows interactions between controlled social environments and uncontrolled social environments, in terms of medical controls, specifically access to vaccines and high risk population bases.

Whoa man, whoa. Sentences are your friends, don't abuse them like that.

Comment: Re:On the fly, but.... (Score 1) 100

by FriendlyStatistician (#46024233) Attached to: New Object Recognition Algorithm Learns On the Fly

Academic journals traditionally require the authors to assign the copyright to the publisher. The authors do not get paid directly, but publications are an important factor in tenure decisions and general academic prestige--"publish or perish."

Some journals allow the authors to post the paper on their website, and some journals which do not technically allow it have generally ignored it in the past, but some publishers have been cracking down on the practice recently.

Comment: Re:Basic Statistics (Score 1) 312

by FriendlyStatistician (#45971245) Attached to: Why Standard Deviation Should Be Retired From Scientific Use

Most statisticians consider standard deviation to be a more meaningful/fundamental measure than mean absolute deviation. I agree with Nassim Taleb that mean absolute deviation is easier to understand, but I disagree that we should switch to using the mean absolute deviation.

(I should note that, contrary to the summary, Taleb is not properly a statistician--he's an economist).

Comment: Re:The big picture (Score 4, Informative) 312

by FriendlyStatistician (#45971095) Attached to: Why Standard Deviation Should Be Retired From Scientific Use

Hi, I'm a statistician.

It's not so simple to just say "ok, we're going to use the Mean Absolute Deviation from now on." The use of standard deviation is not quite the historical accident that Taleb makes it out to be--there are good reasons for using it. Because it is a one-to-one function of the second central moment (variance), it inherits a bunch of nice properties that the mean absolute deviation does not. There is not a one-to-one correspondence between variance and mean absolute deviation.

Taleb is correct that the mean absolute deviation is easier to explain to people, but this is not just a matter of changing units of measure (where there is a one-to-one correspondence) or changing function and variable names in code (where there is again a one-to-one correspondence). Standard deviation and mean absolute deviation have different theoretical properties. These differences have led most statisticians over the last hundred years to conclude that the standard deviation is a better measure of variability, even though it is harder to explain.

I am not now, nor have I ever been, a member of the demigodic party. -- Dennis Ritchie

Working...