|
Dienes posted:Its not nearly as simple as that - its a combination of probability and delay discounting. The kids who don't wait tend to engage in more risky behavior, more drug use, more crime, lower grades, have higher rates of divorce, higher BMI, lower savings, etc. even after you control for differences in incomes. Its a self-perpetuating cycle in which an impoverished environment teaches you to ask impulsively (because the second marshmallow may never come), but then that same impulsivity interferes with your chances of getting OUT of an impoverished environment.
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2020 12:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 03:58 |
|
|
Going back to this clown:SupSuper posted:But wait, there's more! There's more. He's arguing that if the slope is very steep, then that indicates that there's a strong effect regardless of how good that correlation is. https://twitter.com/AmihaiGlazer/status/1280026850736009216 Just... read this whole tweet chain. https://twitter.com/vectorgen/status/1279908546059145226 https://twitter.com/vectorgen/status/1279911430343528449 https://twitter.com/vectorgen/status/1279913320347316224 One more for the road. He is incapable of understanding plots which are not defined by y=F(x). https://twitter.com/AmihaiGlazer/status/1279953253170507777
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2020 13:15
|
|
|
Zereth posted:Hell, if you're sufficiently poor, if you don't eat the metaphorical marshmallow now, there's a good chance you'll get ZERO marshmallows later. Yes, that is exactly what I already said. That was my entire point.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2020 13:19
|
|
|
Maybe the kids know they want a marshmallow now and won’t necessarily appreciate two later. Craving a food one day doesn’t mean a person will crave it the next.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2020 13:26
|
|
|
Eating one marshmallow today and graphing the time consumption of marshmallows shows it has a steeper slope compared to eating one marshmallow today and one a few days later. Economically we can rest assured there is some great force at play here.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2020 13:35
|
|
|
I think the setting would be more realistic if they were offered 1 candy right now, or get 0 to 3 later based on a dice roll. But that would require children who understand the concept of investing, gambling and probabilities, and most likely would never get the ethics board approval.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2020 13:37
|
|
|
Going to very calmly lay out on Twitter 3 reasons why all of my papers can be rejected by any journal with clout: 1. Statisticians are jerks, R2 is just a number and doesnt mean anything 2. High slope, very cool that means there is a large effect and those are easy to write about 3. *Somebody switches the X and Y data* low slope, what a loser result. Nothing is even happening I thought the soft sciences went through a lot of mandatory stats retraining in the 90s and 00d and all new post grad is similar to hard science where you go through stats boot camp and get told very kindly they can either learn stats or make friends with someone who knows how they work. I think I know the answer (because Econ departments are political science departments and think themselves even immune for soft science requirements) but how is some university media wrangler not appearing out of nowhere to abduct this guy to somewhere without Twitter?
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2020 14:01
|
|
|
Der Kyhe posted:I think the setting would be more realistic if they were offered 1 candy right now, or get 0 to 3 later based on a dice roll. To properly represent the American economy, you'd need to start some of the kids out with 10 marshmallows. Then if they choose to gamble and don't get another 3, their parents come in and make up the difference. Then they go on Twitter to brag about how nobody gave them nothing, and they're successful because of hard work.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2020 14:12
|
|
|
Red Bones posted:There's a good book by an economist called Richard Thaler called 'Misbehaving' - he is one of the economists that eventually managed to shift the field away from this point of view. It has been a few years since I read it so I might be getting some of the details slightly wrong, but economics shifted at some point (I think post-WWII, but it might have been earlier?) towards a model that assumed that a human being would always assess a situation and then choose the option with the greatest long-term gain 100% of the time. And this idea was incredibly pervasive within the field to the point of being the widely accepted truth, and was the basis for a lot of economic models, forecasting, etc etc. It's where the modern-day conception of the 'invisible hand of the market' as meaning 'the market will always find the greatest profit' comes from. So I suppose from the 20th century economist perspective they would have viewed mobs as being groups that were rationally making the best choice possible given their situation. This is a good post, but I want to point out one factual error. Kahneman and Tversky weren't economists. They were a pair of psychologists researching cognitive biases. Despite never formally studying economics, Kahneman was awarded the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economics for this research. (Tversky had died by then.  )
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2020 14:19
|
|
|
Vavrek posted:This is a good post, but I want to point out one factual error. Kahneman and Tversky weren't economists. They were a pair of psychologists researching cognitive biases. Despite never formally studying economics, Kahneman was awarded the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economics for this research. (Tversky had died by then. I read "The undoing project", which covered the lives of Kahneman and Tversky and their impact on economics and really enjoyed it. I should also check out Misbehaving.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2020 14:56
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/rlmcelreath/status/1280106715195650048
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2020 15:53
|
|
|
our local cop union apparently thinks this is their winning strategy in budget talks https://twitter.com/SanFranciscoPOA/status/1276586440768385024
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2020 18:19
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/ryxcommar/status/1280268687455457281?s=21
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2020 05:16
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2020 08:34
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2020 20:42
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2020 03:41
|
|
|
"just learn R"
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2020 06:57
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/stephenkb/status/1283020535501332480 The replies to this are pretty interesting, being split mostly between limited nuclear exchange, solar flare knocking out the internet, or no-deal Brexit.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2020 07:34
|
|
|
TinTower posted:https://twitter.com/stephenkb/status/1283020535501332480 Trump showing what he can do in preparation for re-election.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2020 07:37
|
|
|
Is this real? How is it possible that every face has a different size, shape, and color for every single facial feature? There can’t possibly be that many different types of data.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2020 10:22
|
|
|
Ariong posted:Is this real? How is it possible that every face has a different size, shape, and color for every single facial feature? There can’t possibly be that many different types of data. i think the data is from this article 
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2020 11:25
|
|
man
|
I don't know how to gif but these would make a great avatar rotating between the faces.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2020 11:38
|
|
|
TinTower posted:https://twitter.com/stephenkb/status/1283020535501332480 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AVXK0CcBZaM&t=118s
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2020 22:35
|
|
|
A chart is a diagram, but is a diagram a chart? Whatever, I don't know where else to put this. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2020 02:17
|
|
|
yeeting a dead horse
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2020 02:22
|
|
|
Wifi Toilet posted:A chart is a diagram, but is a diagram a chart? So we're exploding a horse, but we're also concerned about safety? Just what exactly is the goal, here?
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2020 02:25
|
|
|
Memento posted:So we're exploding a horse, but we're also concerned about safety? Just what exactly is the goal, here? Not attracting wolves.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2020 02:31
|
|
|
Memento posted:So we're exploding a horse, but we're also concerned about safety? Just what exactly is the goal, here? Spreading the remains out so that scavengers and etc can eat it easily, instead of it becoming a huge meat rotpile. (that could contaminate nearby water supplies ) I think it's a semi common way to handle it when you can't get the body out easily? I vaguely remember that being the reason that one time they found an entire barn filled with dead, frozen cows.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2020 02:31
|
|
|
Memento posted:So we're exploding a horse, but we're also concerned about safety? Just what exactly is the goal, here?  e: https://www.nps.gov/parkhistory/online_books/npsg/explosives/Chapter11.pdf I guess this might have been better suited for the OSHA thread Wifi Toilet has a new favorite as of 02:34 on Jul 16, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2020 02:31
|
|
|
Memento posted:So we're exploding a horse, but we're also concerned about safety? Just what exactly is the goal, here? Exploding a horse safely.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2020 02:32
|
|
|
The Parks Service is preparing for a visit by the Vice President.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2020 02:41
|
|
|
The Venn diagram of 'Rancher' and 'Browsed Wikipedia article on Orion Platforms'.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2020 03:11
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:yeeting a dead horse I giggled
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2020 04:16
|
|
|
Does no one else remember that video of people trying to use this technique on a goddamn whale?
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2020 04:52
|
|
|
Wifi Toilet posted:A chart is a diagram, but is a diagram a chart? famously not reccommended for whales
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2020 05:06
|
|
|
Memento posted:So we're exploding a horse, but we're also concerned about safety? Just what exactly is the goal, here? I used to work with a former combat engineer and he would always tell me “There is no problem in the human condition that cannot be solved with the proper and precise application of explosives. “
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2020 09:56
|
|
|
Not exploding.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2020 10:09
|
|
|
Regarde Aduck posted:Not exploding. Use explosives to blow up the explosives. Duh.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2020 10:37
|
|
|
EasilyConfused posted:Use explosives to blow up the explosives. Duh. That’s basically the safest way to dispose of unexploded ordnance or various bombs, so... yes, actually.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2020 10:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 03:58 |
|
|
Ugly In The Morning posted:I used to work with a former combat engineer and he would always tell me “There is no problem in the human condition that cannot be solved with the proper and precise application of explosives. “ the heat death of the universe
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2020 10:44
|
|