claudia603: (Default)
([personal profile] claudia603 Sep. 20th, 2017 05:37 am)
A birthday, a thing of great wonder...:)

6b45a1bf-2bf8-414d-8425-9f01ec1a13b7_560_420

Happy Birthday to the lovely [livejournal.com profile] lbilover!!!

I hope you have an enjoyable day planned with doggies and hikes and delicious cake!
The Guardian: Medieval porpoise 'grave' on Channel island puzzles archaeologists

I love everything about this story:

Archaeologists digging at an island religious retreat have unearthed the remains of a porpoise that, mystifyingly, appears to have been carefully buried in its own medieval grave.

MAYBE THE PORPOISE WAS A MONK, HAVE YOU THOUGHT ABOUT THAT.

... and now I eagerly await the medieval monk were-porpoise shifter romance.

For a different kind of wonderful:

The Fader: This Artist Is Filling London With Murals Of Extraordinary Black Women

The art is gorgeous, but what I really love is that he's portraying his female friends, people who aren't famous but are ordinary/extraordinary people - a youth worker, a psychotherapist, and so on. And I love the shots of the murals with the real women posed next to them.
 I know I post a lot about my stupid academic job, and it is boring. So boring. And sometimes I talk about academic things. 

I also have a filter for that. If you would like to be on it, please comment below and I will add you to the academic filter. (I think I have a few recent followers who are academics.) Please note: I don't mean to be exclusionary. Don't feel you need to work in academia to be on the filter. I have just found that many people who don't work in academia don't want to hear about it either. 
It just didn't work out. So perhaps tomorrow or Thursday.

I had a mostly utilitarian day. Woke up a few minutes before the (horrible) alarm at 7:00. Booked my rides for next week. Hung out on the computer. Exchanged e-mails with my sis RS about a family reunion on Thanksgiving Saturday. Yay, she's in. By the time the afternoon rolled around, I was zonked. Did my customary dozing off during the news (also earlier, with the Nature music channel on). Managed to get through the game shows and snorfled at the Jeopardy! Final: "Crown Royal" or "Royal Crown". Sooooo easy. Did another rewatch of this week's The Orville just because it puts me in a good mood.

Read my weird book for a while and I think I'll be returning to it. And then I'm hoping to get in some more good sleep tonight. ::crosses fingers::
beccaelizabeth: my Watcher tattoo in blue, plus Be in red Buffy style font (Default)
([personal profile] beccaelizabeth Sep. 19th, 2017 09:52 pm)
squick of the day: when reading old (old) meta and they start trying to fit Team TARDIS into a sedoretu without knowing who River is...

... canon was awkward, but not that awkward.
beccaelizabeth: my Watcher tattoo in blue, plus Be in red Buffy style font (Default)
([personal profile] beccaelizabeth Sep. 19th, 2017 08:20 pm)
I was reading some sedoretu fic
and it just seems, like, really practical and useful and stuff.
Like, those relationships staying together seems solid.

Read more... )
twistedchick: (bittern OFQ)
([personal profile] twistedchick Sep. 19th, 2017 02:16 pm)
This so-called article is a piece of crap. It purports to provide the results of a study and conflates the numbers in the study with society as a whole in ignorant ways.

For example, second paragraph:

Just ask college students. A fifth of undergrads now say it’s acceptable to use physical force to silence a speaker who makes “offensive and hurtful statements.”


A fifth of undergrads? No. A fifth of the 1500 undergrad students they surveyed. That's 300 or so.


Villasenor conducted a nationwide survey of 1,500 undergraduate students at four-year colleges.


Nationwide? There are far more than 1,500 four-year colleges (for those of you not American, the word includes universities). How were the colleges chosen? How were the students chosen? How many were chosen at each university? How many overall were from the same discipline? There's no way to know. We don't even know if he chose accredited schools, or those pay-for-a-degree places. Did they ask at Ivy League schools, the majority of whose students come from well-off families? Did they ask at places like City College of New York, where the tuition is much lower and people who are there are from a variety of backgrounds, not wealthy? Ag and tech colleges, out in the countryside, or only urban colleges?

Further down it says the margin of error is 2-6 percent, "depending on the group." Oh, really? Which group is 2% and which is 6%? We aren't told. It appears we are to be grateful that a margin of error was even mentioned.

The whole thing is supposed to be about undergrads' understanding of First Amendment-protected free speech. Since we are not told the exact wording of the questions asked, it's impossible to know if the responses were appropriate to them, or if the questions were leading the students to a specific response.

And then there's this:

Let’s say a public university hosts a “very controversial speaker,” one “known for making offensive and hurtful statements.” Would it be acceptable for a student group to disrupt the speech “by loudly and repeatedly shouting so that the audience cannot hear the speaker”?

Astonishingly, half said that snuffing out upsetting speech — rather than, presumably, rebutting or even ignoring it — would be appropriate. Democrats were more likely than Republicans to find this response acceptable (62 percent to 39 percent), and men were more likely than women (57 percent to 47 percent). Even so, sizable shares of all groups agreed.

It gets even worse.

Respondents were also asked if it would be acceptable for a student group to use violence to prevent that same controversial speaker from talking. Here, 19 percent said yes....


Let's look more closely, ignoring the editorializing sentence for the moment. Half of who? Half of 1500 people is 750 people, scattered across the US. And then again -- 19% of who? Everyone? Women? Men? Democrats? Republicans? We aren't told.

Meanwhile, the entire other side of this survey is ignored. By stressing the minority and ignoring the majority, the minority's views are inflated and made more important. Let me turn this around for you: more than 80% of undergrads say that violence is not acceptable in dealing with an unwanted speaker. Try turning around all the other numbers, and the story falls apart. Instead of "students" substitute "students surveyed", and it also falls to pieces. Who cares what 1500 people out of 200 million think? If we don't know why those 1500 were specifically chosen, why should we care?

I have worked with surveys, written surveys, conducted and analyzed surveys. It is possible to have a statistically perfect survey with 1500 people surveyed, but only if the respondents are very carefully selected to avoid bias. There is no way to tell if that was done with the evidence given in this story. For all we know, those respondents could have been selected from the same departments or majors at all the colleges. The colleges could have been technical schools or enormous state universities or religion-affiliated schools. There is no way to know. Why does this matter? Liberal arts, political science and pre-law students are more likely to have read about the First Amendment than optics majors or engineers, for instance. I'm not saying the optics majors or engineers would be more conservative or liberal -- but they are less likely to have discussed free speech in a class. Improper choice of respondents can provide very slanted results -- for example, the survey that said Dewey would win over Truman was conducted by telephone, and the calls went to houses on the corners of two streets; this meant that people who were wealthier (because corner houses pay higher taxes, based on road frontage) were questioned, while their less wealthy neighbors (who voted for Truman) were ignored.

Also, by not including any context relative to current events, there is no way to know if the small percentage who thought violence was acceptable was the same as during the Vietnam War, for instance, or Desert Storm. I guarantee you, it was not the same percentage as during the Revolutionary War, when those who spoke against any prevailing view to an audience who disagreed would have been lucky to have been ridden out of town on a rail, if not tarred and feathered. (Feel free to do the research if you wish; be sure you have a strong stomach for the details of what happens when boiling tar is applied to skin.)

What it all comes down to is this: this story is written poorly by someone who does not understand how statistics should be used, and was not properly edited. It was published in order to scare people, although the publisher may not have realized its propaganda value. By not including the whole story, and by allowing editorializing in the middle of it, it slants the results.

This would not have been published during the time when Kay Graham was publisher. Editor Ben Bradlee would not have let this story pass. He would have told the reporter to rewrite it, clean it up, and get more depth into it.

And the reason I am writing this is that this is not the only paper that misleads with statistics, and you need to be aware of this, and of what to look for when someone is quoting a study, badly, misleadingly, in a way that bids fair to be used for propaganda. Be cautious and critical when you see numbers and statistics, and look for whether the writing is made personal/editorialized. It matters.
calliopes_pen: (lost_spook Mina covets the ring)
([personal profile] calliopes_pen Sep. 19th, 2017 06:35 am)
The rest of the nominations have been approved for Yuletide.

✔ Count Dracula (1977)
Characters
✔ Renfield (Count Dracula 1977)
✔ Jonathan Harker (Count Dracula 1977)
✔ Dracula (Count Dracula 1977)
✔ Mina Westenra Harker (Count Dracula 1977)

✔ Dracula (TV 1968)
Characters
✔ Jonathan Harker (Dracula TV 1968)
✔ Mina Harker (Dracula TV 1968)
✔ John Seward (Dracula TV 1968)
✔ Lucy Weston (Dracula TV 1968)
Tags:
helenkacan: (Default)
([personal profile] helenkacan Sep. 18th, 2017 10:42 pm)
Of course I do. After all, it's the day after. And that's usually a letdown. What isn't usual is actually having a headache. Oh, sure, sinus aches; and, since 2008, eye socket aches. But not pain in between the eyebrows. So I spent most of the day in bed, first zoning out and napping in the morning, then dispiritedly reading my very strange book. Watched the usual TV in the evening. Didn't communicate with anyone. OTOH, SuM brought me the all-male Swan Lake from the library (wonderful!) and we're going to have a movie night on Wednesday with another biographical movie. I figured I'd watch the ballet tomorrow as I'm sure the music will make me feel better. ::crosses fingers::
beccaelizabeth: my Watcher tattoo in blue, plus Be in red Buffy style font (Default)
([personal profile] beccaelizabeth Sep. 19th, 2017 03:34 am)
It might be nice to live somewhere that the neighbours were not three in the morning people
or you didn't have to play 'bottle or window - smash noise identification'
settiai: (Space -- roxicons)
([personal profile] settiai Sep. 18th, 2017 07:58 pm)
Out of curiosity, is anyone interested in a Kindle Paperwhite. It's the previous edition, so it's not the latest one, but it still works perfectly fine. Pretty much the only time that I use it nowadays is when I'm traveling via plane, which I don't see happening any time soon since I don't plan on going back to Tennessee for the holidays this year. So since my checking account is still somewhat lighter than I'd like, I thought that I'd at least see if anyone might want one.

I also still have quite a few things available in the virtual garage sale post that I put up several weeks ago. And I'm very much willing to haggle when it comes to listed prices, if you're interested in anything.

(Oh, and for those of you who donated to my Ko-fi page and requested fic, it's coming! The last few weeks have been absolutely hell, which deserves its own post, but things are calming down and I actually have time to breathe again.)
beccaelizabeth: my Watcher tattoo in blue, plus Be in red Buffy style font (Default)
([personal profile] beccaelizabeth Sep. 18th, 2017 09:55 pm)
with a very fast engagement, Wally's mom, and a bit of an oops.

also the point where I'm pretty sure me knowing the ending means I'm not getting the same experience of watching this. so spoilers for later episodes below.

Read more... )
Why is Barry having a big argument about killing Grodd
and nobody is mentioning
Al Rothstein, Eddie Slick and Griffin Grey.

Were there others? I honestly can't remember right now.

Read more... )



I am also bored by mind control, so that's a blah.

But Grodd stories, especially one where the first half had Barry win by doing a Reverse Flash, are about how they're both shaped by how they were raised, and what that man Grodd calls father gave them. So there's three of Wells in this story, the two live bodies and the influence of the murderer. Which is cool. Barry deciding whether or not to kill is absolutely a story to explore with this kind of comparison.

But it really needs to remember he already did.
.

Profile

janedavitt: (Default)
janedavitt

Most Popular Tags

Powered by Dreamwidth Studios

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags