Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #116624
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.os.linux.advocacy |
| Subject | Re: That "Anomaly" in Linux Statistics |
| Date | 2012-06-28 15:16 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <CC1225DC.4285%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> (permalink) |
| References | (1 earlier) <dcd526a4-0e6a-4167-ad8d-d4ae6c05ddbb@googlegroups.com> <CC121250.425D%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> <13ca71ae-4ecd-4a70-ad70-d5a266d9ee19@googlegroups.com> <CC121CFC.4271%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> <fd13ae9f-62aa-428a-ae86-25f6883c1200@googlegroups.com> |
On 6/28/12 2:45 PM, in article fd13ae9f-62aa-428a-ae86-25f6883c1200@googlegroups.com, "cc" <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> wrote: > On Thursday, June 28, 2012 5:38:52 PM UTC-4, Snit wrote: >> On 6/28/12 2:21 PM, in article >> 13ca71ae-4ecd-4a70-ad70-d5a266d9ee19@googlegroups.com, "cc" >> <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> wrote: >> >>> So you want to say you were right in your prediction, but only for 6 months, >>> and only in California (which again, is a dubious claim)? >> >> You made that up. See: when faced with facts you lie. >> >>> Well, that's a hilarious interpretation of being right considering it was an >>> open-ended prediction for all desktop Linux usage everywhere, but if that's >>> what you're so desperately trying to cling to, then I guess I can give it to >>> you. >> >> LOL! You just make things up as you go. You lie. >> >> And it amuses me. >> > > What is a lie? No wonder you so rarely tell the truth: you do not even know that a lie is something you knowingly tell which is contrary to the truth. > Did the rest of the world see an increase in Linux usage? Nope. This is not in contention. > Did you originally state your prediction was only for the last part of 2011? > Nope. This is not in contention. > So if you're saying there's a correlation, then it's only for the last > part of 2011 and only for California. See: you are clueless on what you have been told. And you snip and run from your mistakes: 1) You were wrong to claim it was a "fact" that some data points were outliers: the reality is that there is no clear definition nor single standard way to determine such, and thus such determinations are subjective and *not* "facts". 2) You made a rather silly claim to say that 17% of the data are "outliers" - especially when those data are in a direct series tied to a *very* clear trend that includes 25% of the data. 3) Outliers are atypical - you clearly are stretching to call 17% of the data, which occurs in a clear pattern, "atypical" to the data. Tied to the top 3: <http://tinyurl.com/7hymgfg>. Makes it very clear just how clueless cc is. 4) You have clearly placed a great deal of focus on the correlation coefficient even though it is unwise to do so at the expense of a focus on the visual graphs / visible trends. 5) You were wrong to deny that the sigma lines can be correctly drawn based on the distance from the mean to the inflection points. 6) You were wrong to deny that the poorly done depictions I showed you were, in fact, poorly done. They were unambiguously wrong. 7) You were wrong to say I missed steps in the creation of a linear trend line in Excel. I did no such thing (and you never were able to list any steps I missed in creating a linear trend line, nor explain why the MS site and others would also miss these "steps" you spoke about) 8) You were wrong to say I was pushing the correlations I noted as being proof of the causation I had spoken of earlier. I did no such thing. 9) You repeatedly snip and ignore comments which are contrary to your claimed views. These things are *not* in contention either. Hence why you snip and run. > That's pretty far from your original statement. One: your lies are very different than my statements. That is not in contention. Two: as we get new data I alter my views... as is the rational and honest thing to do. This is what you are incapable of doing... to the point that you see it as a bad thing when I do it. Yes: you think it is *bad* that I alter my views based on new data. > But hey, if your tiny brain in your fat head somehow sees that as being > "right" then what can I do? You do realize that you have made it clear you know you are lying, right? I keep asking you that and you keep running. You hate knowing how obvious your lies are. -- Summary of cc's statistical BS: <http://tinyurl.com/7rwazxw> Details on cc's "outliers" BS: <http://tinyurl.com/84r3ypq> More on cc's ignorance about outliers: <http://tinyurl.com/7vyhttc> Details on cc's sigma and R^2 BS: <http://tinyurl.com/7vambev>
Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar
Re: That "Anomaly" in Linux Statistics Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2012-06-28 09:59 -0700
Re: That "Anomaly" in Linux Statistics cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2012-06-28 11:35 -0700
Re: That "Anomaly" in Linux Statistics Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2012-06-28 13:53 -0700
Re: That "Anomaly" in Linux Statistics cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2012-06-28 14:21 -0700
Re: That "Anomaly" in Linux Statistics Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2012-06-28 14:38 -0700
Re: That "Anomaly" in Linux Statistics cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2012-06-28 14:45 -0700
Re: That "Anomaly" in Linux Statistics Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2012-06-28 15:16 -0700
Re: That "Anomaly" in Linux Statistics Onion Knight <onionknightgot@hotmail.com> - 2012-06-29 05:10 -0700
Re: That "Anomaly" in Linux Statistics Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2012-06-29 10:36 -0700
Re: That "Anomaly" in Linux Statistics Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2012-06-29 10:45 -0700
Long term desktop Linux trend is going up Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2012-06-29 12:49 -0700
Re: Long term desktop Linux trend is going up Big Steel <YouCanRun111277@ButYouCannotHide111277.com> - 2012-06-29 15:59 -0400
Re: Long term desktop Linux trend is going up Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2012-06-29 13:11 -0700
Re: Long term desktop Linux trend is going up Big Steel <YouCanRun111277@ButYouCannotHide111277.com> - 2012-06-29 16:18 -0400
Re: Long term desktop Linux trend is going up Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2012-06-29 13:28 -0700
Re: Long term desktop Linux trend is going up Foster <frankfoster50@yahoo.com> - 2012-06-29 16:40 -0400
Re: Long term desktop Linux trend is going up Nobody <invalid@invalid.com> - 2012-06-29 17:48 -0500
Re: Long term desktop Linux trend is going up Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2012-06-29 17:46 -0700
Re: Long term desktop Linux trend is going up Onion Knight <onionknightgot@gmail.com> - 2012-06-29 22:22 -0700
Re: Long term desktop Linux trend is going up Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2012-06-30 11:06 -0700
Re: Long term desktop Linux trend is going up Foster <frankfoster50@yahoo.com> - 2012-06-30 08:36 -0400
Re: Long term desktop Linux trend is going up Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2012-06-30 10:12 -0700
Re: Long term desktop Linux trend is going up Tattoo Vampire <fake@fakeemail.com> - 2012-06-30 09:55 -0400
Re: Long term desktop Linux trend is going up Nobody <invalid@invalid.com> - 2012-06-30 10:51 -0500
Re: Long term desktop Linux trend is going up Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2012-06-30 10:33 -0700
Re: Long term desktop Linux trend is going up Nobody <invalid@invalid.com> - 2012-06-30 13:04 -0500
Re: Long term desktop Linux trend is going up Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2012-06-30 11:38 -0700
Re: Long term desktop Linux trend is going up Nobody <invalid@invalid.com> - 2012-06-30 13:54 -0500
Re: Long term desktop Linux trend is going up Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2012-06-30 12:56 -0700
Re: Long term desktop Linux trend is going up Nobody <invalid@invalid.com> - 2012-06-30 15:34 -0500
Re: Long term desktop Linux trend is going up Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2012-06-30 13:56 -0700
Re: Long term desktop Linux trend is going up Nobody <invalid@invalid.com> - 2012-06-30 16:34 -0500
Re: Long term desktop Linux trend is going up Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2012-06-30 14:39 -0700
Re: Long term desktop Linux trend is going up Nobody <invalid@invalid.com> - 2012-06-30 17:05 -0500
Re: Long term desktop Linux trend is going up Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2012-06-30 18:49 -0700
Re: Long term desktop Linux trend is going up GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2012-06-30 16:15 -0600
Re: Long term desktop Linux trend is going up Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2012-06-30 18:40 -0700
Re: Long term desktop Linux trend is going up GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2012-06-30 22:19 -0600
Re: Long term desktop Linux trend is going up Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2012-06-30 23:16 -0700
Re: Long term desktop Linux trend is going up Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2012-06-29 17:36 -0700
Re: Long term desktop Linux trend is going up Foster <frankfoster50@yahoo.com> - 2012-06-30 08:26 -0400
Re: Long term desktop Linux trend is going up Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2012-06-30 10:14 -0700
Re: Long term desktop Linux trend is going up Nobody <invalid@invalid.com> - 2012-06-30 10:55 -0500
Re: Long term desktop Linux trend is going up Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2012-06-30 10:46 -0700
Re: Long term desktop Linux trend is going up Nobody <invalid@invalid.com> - 2012-06-30 13:44 -0500
Re: Long term desktop Linux trend is going up Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2012-06-30 11:58 -0700
Re: Long term desktop Linux trend is going up Nobody <invalid@invalid.com> - 2012-06-30 14:12 -0500
Re: Long term desktop Linux trend is going up Onion Knight <onionknightgot@gmail.com> - 2012-06-29 22:00 -0700
Re: Long term desktop Linux trend is going up Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2012-06-30 11:01 -0700
Re: Long term desktop Linux trend is going up Onion Knight <onionknightgot@gmail.com> - 2012-06-30 13:51 -0700
Re: Long term desktop Linux trend is going up Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2012-06-30 14:48 -0700
Re: Long term desktop Linux trend is going up Onion Knight <onionknightgot@gmail.com> - 2012-06-30 21:11 -0700
Re: Long term desktop Linux trend is going up Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2012-06-30 23:09 -0700
Re: That "Anomaly" in Linux Statistics Onion Knight <onionknightgot@gmail.com> - 2012-06-29 21:59 -0700
Re: That "Anomaly" in Linux Statistics Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2012-06-30 10:59 -0700
Re: That "Anomaly" in Linux Statistics Onion Knight <onionknightgot@gmail.com> - 2012-06-29 21:57 -0700
Re: That "Anomaly" in Linux Statistics High Plains Thumper <hpt@invalid.invalid> - 2012-06-29 23:02 -0600
Re: That "Anomaly" in Linux Statistics Foster <frankfoster50@yahoo.com> - 2012-06-30 08:49 -0400
Re: That "Anomaly" in Linux Statistics Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2012-06-30 10:07 -0700
Re: That "Anomaly" in Linux Statistics Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2012-06-30 10:55 -0700
Re: That "Anomaly" in Linux Statistics Onion Knight <onionknightgot@gmail.com> - 2012-06-29 21:41 -0700
Re: That "Anomaly" in Linux Statistics High Plains Thumper <hpt@invalid.invalid> - 2012-06-29 22:59 -0600
csiph-web