Anyone can CRANK THEIR HOGG!

Hell yeah! Crank it!

Do you ever wonder why we’re here?

No. We’re having a barbecue over at blue base later, want to come?

HAWWWWGG

We didn’t have encarta either. We would break out the encyclopedia

And any school project started with the encyclopedia and then a trip to the library for further research.

When I learned about Wikipedia it was awesome.

Tonight my wife’s phone needed to be fixed and I needed a battery replacement. We spent the whole evening hanging out at the mall with no phones and had a great time just goofing around and wandering.

It almost felt like being a teenager again.

I’m thankful that my being around each other turns a long boring chore into a pretty fun evening.

Lemmit.online too.

That one I think is entirely a bot that scrapes reddit, so I just blocked the whole instance.

Filter out by instance, then by community.

I haven’t hoisted the main sale in many many many moons, so I’m totally out of that world.

I’ve made enough that I felt I should support content I like for a while, but the contract has been falling apart with the number of streaming services and pulling paid content from your digital library.

The new version uses Stan who will judge you silently for not knowing what you’re doing.

He also gives you mysterious C++ compilation errors to keep things interesting.

You’re allowed to not show your work, you just have to write either “this is left as an exercise to the reader” or “it is trivial to show that …”

I bought that blu ray for $1 and it was well worth it.

Excellent bonus features about Roman society! Also IRL Commodus was wayyy more bonkers than I expected, yet Caligula and Nero are the ones we talk about as crazy.

Side note: blu ray still looks better than streaming by a long shot, garage sale season is the time to stock up on media.

I had a friend with that same age gap in university, he was actually a great influence because he had life experience.

He was basically retired from his first career and taking classes for fun, awesome dude.

A favourite textbook for me:

https://sites.google.com/site/doingbayesiandataanalysis/

I read the whole article and I don’t think it’s bad.

He does have some points: that masculinity itself need not be seen as inherently toxic, and therapy for men should be designed for the needs of men.

Overall, the broad ideas all seem reasonable to me.

I even read a couple more of his articles and read one of his papers.

In the one paper I think his methodology from a math perspective was a bit dated and weak from current standards (e.g. binning and grouping variables, trimming outliers, how he used PCA), but is fairly average to see in research.

One thing he focused on and I want to call out specifically was his inference that a negative coefficient on the view “masculinity is negative” implies seeing masculinity as positive is good for mental health.

That inference isn’t logically or statistically correct. It’s simply stating that men who see masculinity as inherently negative had worse mental health, it says nothing about seeing masculinity positively impacting mental health. That’s a really big distinction to me, and it wasn’t a huge factor in the analysis to be the main conclusion (and he criticizes another paper for doing the same thing).

I’d love to see his same analysis done with some improvements to the math though!

Anyways, I digress, I get too into math. His ideas are not Jordan Peterson’s ideas, they’re reasonable ideas.