Well he seems to survive every time so... Penultimate destination?
That article is confusing, the title suggests there's a difference in how "should" and "ought" are used, but besides the fact that "ought" sometimes comes with "to" there doesn't seem to be one.
There are very good reasons not to microwave tea, first of all:

I usually find microwaving anything in a mug adds some unpleasant flavour from the mug. Using glass eliminates this, but worth noting.

Microwaving the tea itself will break down some compounds and release more tannins, your tea will be worse.
But even if you're just microwaving the water, the kettle wins (depending on what tea you are brewing). Black tea should be brewed as close as possible to 100°C  when you have a kettle you should pour it just as it comes off the boil, around 9095°C. By that point the water has actually been boiling for quite a while (at least the water around the element), allowing the rest of it to heat up. It's very difficult to achieve this in a microwave, and dangerous too since you can just end up spraying boiling water around your microwave.
Writing boring shit is LLM dream stuff. Especially tedious corpo shit. I have to write letters and such a lot, it makes it so much easier having a machine that can summarise material and write it in dry corporate language in 10 seconds. I already have to proof read my own writing, and there's almost always 1 or 2 other approvers, so checking it for errors is no extra effort.
Elapsed time but not necessarily working time. Working time costs a lot more than elapsed time.
I got one of those old browsers with no tabs. If I wanna think about something new I gotta open a whole new window, man.
I mean if you don't like replacing gear for similar stuff with better stats I don't think looter shooters are for you haha! The story is pretty basic but I do enjoy the random dialogue you get when just flying about once you've unlocked HIVE
Personally I'd rather see those jobs done by robots. No one wants that job, let the robot do it.
I would recommend Everspace 2. It's quite a different game, it's a space dogfighter first and foremost... But it's also somewhat a light RPG looter shooter. It's great, and still recieving updates (slowly).
Do you think the paper drew sensible conclusions, or do you just not like my arguments?
A correlation coefficient of .5 is in the ballpark of or bigger than the correlation between human height and weight. I wouldn’t be surprised if the bottleneck isn’t in the reliability of the measurement.
This is fair enough, my background is not in social research so to me 0.5 is a moderate correlation. Not sure what you mean by the 'bottleneck' here, are you suggesting that the correlations could be higher with a different survey?
Unmodeled interactions here also would only be able to suppress the explained variance  adding them in could only increase the Rsquared!
Given that the explanatory variables are in some cases more strongly correlated with each other than the response, do you think the model without interactions is likely to be an appropriate way to analyse the relationship between the response and the explanatory variables? It doesn't at all make sense to me to do one single regression model and say "The F test says this is a good model, so the explanatory variables explain the response", especially with a relatively low R^2, and given the fact that there is evidence of multicollinearity presented alongside!
The paper presents the fact that they have done a regression model with a few good significances without any real analysis of if that model is good. We don't see if the relationships are linear, we don't see if the model assumptions are met. Just doing a regression is not enough, in my opinion.
In case your 101 course hasn’t covered that yet:
There's no need to be rude. It's perfectly acceptable to disagree with me, but you could do it politely.
Ftests are also commonly used when performing an analysis of variance.
Yes, I'm well aware, although I'm not sure what your point is. They haven't done any analysis of variance.
As is it’s impossible to say if the model they found is actually very good.
You say that after quoting explained variance, which is much more useful (could use confidence intervals… but significance substitutes here a little) in this context for judging how good a model is in absolute terms than some model comparison would be (which could give relative goodness).
My point is that they haven't made any effort to find a model that best fits the data, they have just taken all the available variables, smacked them into python or R or whatever, and written down the statistics it spits out. There's no consideration in the paper given to interpreting the statistics, or to confirming their validity.
From the study:
Although the regression weight for age was not significant, the direction was negative, suggesting greater endorsement for the car items for the younger sample.
Not only was pvalue for age clearly not significant, the confidence interval for the coefficient was [–.21, .17]..... This includes 0 ffs! There's no evidence here that there is greater endorsement of the car items in younger respondents. Why was age even included in the model in the first place, given that the correlation was near 0?
Like I said  there is some evidence here of an interaction, I'll concede that in context the correlation isn't bad for 2 of the dark tetrad items, Wild and Crafty, but the analysis they have used to present this information is not well thought out or presented. Personally I don't think that a linear regression model is even the right way to analyse the data they have, I especially don't think this regression model is a good way to analyse the data.
Yes as long as it isnt one person 8 votes another person 9. Although, the electoral college somewhat is that anyway... A vote in one state is not equivalent to a vote in another.
You're right to be sceptical. The paper is poorly written, and overstates many of the results they found. The correlations identified between the car score and the dark tetrad scores aren't really very high, the highest is 0.51! They produced a regression model and deduced that because the Ftest had a low p value that the dark tetrad scores predicted the car score. The Ftest, for clarity, determines if a model predicts the response variable better than a model with no explanatory variables.
Also worth noting that there were stronger correlations between the explanatory variables than for any of the explanatory variables with the response. They should have included interactions in their regression model to incorporate this, or even better tried a set of models and compared them with ANOVA or similar. As is it's impossible to say if the model they found is actually very good. It only explains 29% of the variance which... Well, it's a statistic which is better for comparing models, but it suggests quite clearly they most of the variance in the car score is not explained but the dark tetrad scores.
There's a smattering of evidence in here that there's some statistical link between the scores, but it's not been well explored or presented, and there are issues with the statistical approach. Based on some comments in the discussion section I'd agree with your suggestion that the author is simply trying to confirm their hypothesis.
It makes a lot more sense for me to make myself rich now than to make a version of myself rich who will never become me.
Could be analysing 4 band imagery with an NIR layer. But then that usually comes from satellite imagery so it would make identifying gender challenging. I'd struggle with just a grainy image of the top of someone's head, even if I knew how warm it was.
[Meta] Can we change how the answer is revealed?
As is, once a post is solved it's revealed in the name, but this means you can't then try to guess already solved posts  only new ones. If we reveal the answer in a spoiler in the post body instead, the sub's historical posts will remain playable for new players to practice.
Bug: The comment button under each post is inconsistent.
Tricky to explain exactly. Sometimes the comment button goes straight to adding a new comment rather than the post's comments. To reach the comments I have to press it again. But because it's not consistent sometimes I have to press it several times to reach the actual comments.