Topic: I just don't know......

Anonymous A started this discussion 2 years ago #110,381

whether to shit or wind my watch. Guess I'll just shit on the watch.

Analyticity joined in and replied with this 2 years ago, 1 hour later[^] [v] #1,229,047

hi matt

Anonymous C joined in and replied with this 2 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,229,049

@previous (Analyticity)
Nope, but thanks for your obsession anyway!

Anonymous D joined in and replied with this 2 years ago, 3 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,229,052

@previous (C)
Thanks for the datapoint

Analyticity double-posted this 2 years ago, 4 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,229,054

@1,229,049 (C)
meta 70%

Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 2 years ago, 2 hours later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,229,072

@1,229,047 (Analyticity)

> hi matt

Hello. Now we got the greetings out of the way. Lets get things back on topic. So do you think I should wind or shit on my watch?

Anonymous C replied with this 2 years ago, 11 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,229,073

@previous (A)
You are not Matt, you idiot.

Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 2 years ago, 31 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,229,076

@previous (C)
Then why did you say hi and call me matt?

Anonymous C replied with this 2 years ago, 44 seconds later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,229,078

@previous (A)
I did not, you maniac!

Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 2 years ago, 7 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,229,080

@previous (C)
lol I gotta lay off that red wine late at night

Analyticity replied with this 2 years ago, 56 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,229,092

@1,229,072 (A)
Meta 80%
@1,229,073 (C)
Matt 90%

@1,229,076 (A)
Meta 80%

@1,229,078 (C)
Matt 90%

@previous (A)
Meta 80%
Becky 20%

Interesting the impact bayesian inference has on prior belief using parameters gleaned from the posterior distribution and asserting the null hypothesis.

I haven't seen the model select for Becky until the alternative hypothesis also implies Matt's a drunk. Obviously the regression analysis is strongly implying a significant correlation to heat map operators. The scatter plots from this when visualizing data after I'm done with hypothesis testing are going to be amazing, I think.

Even though I strongly doubt any correlations have been made this early on, it's kinda funny it selected for Becky despite a virtually empty dataset, incomplete preprocessing and no descriptive statistics on becky indicators.

It's like it knows. But I'm sure it's just a fluke, but interesting nonetheless.

Anonymous C replied with this 2 years ago, 2 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,229,093

@previous (Analyticity)
You are so Autistic that it is painful.

(½,0)⨁(0,½) replied with this 2 years ago, 1 hour later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,229,099

@previous (C)
oh, okay
kook 90%
jolibee 90%

(Edited 7 minutes later.)

(½,0)⨁(0,½) double-posted this 2 years ago, 27 minutes later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,229,100

wait, who the fuck is jolibee?

Anonymous E joined in and replied with this 2 years ago, 7 hours later, 15 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,229,109

I just don't know whether to shit or wash my shirt. Guess I'll just shit on the shirt.

Phatthew Phosteet Philler joined in and replied with this 2 years ago, 4 hours later, 20 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,229,132

@1,229,047 (Analyticity)
Wrong again, obsessed fuckface! Thanks.

Minichan