On the Notion of a Tom Bishop Comment

  • 45 Replies
  • 7830 Views
*

Rushy

  • 8971
Re: On the Notion of a Tom Bishop Comment
« Reply #30 on: April 13, 2012, 10:14:31 PM »
Then I have nothing but contempt for your useless post.

Should I annotate this response as a negative value point or a zero? You could say zero represents the lack of response, but then how many zeroes would I annotate should someone not respond? How many possible responses would there assumed to be? Should I assume that every registered user on the site could have responded to my post? That is a lot of zeroes! Decisions, decisions.
I am not sure where you get this.
Zero means Zero.
You don't need more than one unless there is a number prior to it.
1000 - 1000 = 0.
Not 0000.
Well, technically it does, but you don't write it like that. That'd be confusing.

Whoooooooosh.

In order to make this even plausibly resemble non-low content, I'm going to note that is the sound of the thought experiment flying over your head.

?

Graff

  • 538
  • ROBOSCORPIONS ATTACK!
Re: On the Notion of a Tom Bishop Comment
« Reply #31 on: April 13, 2012, 10:17:42 PM »
Then I have nothing but contempt for your useless post.

Should I annotate this response as a negative value point or a zero? You could say zero represents the lack of response, but then how many zeroes would I annotate should someone not respond? How many possible responses would there assumed to be? Should I assume that every registered user on the site could have responded to my post? That is a lot of zeroes! Decisions, decisions.
I am not sure where you get this.
Zero means Zero.
You don't need more than one unless there is a number prior to it.
1000 - 1000 = 0.
Not 0000.
Well, technically it does, but you don't write it like that. That'd be confusing.

Whoooooooosh.

In order to make this even plausibly resemble non-low content, I'm going to note that is the sound of the thought experiment flying over your head.
In all honesty your little "experiment" seems more like gibberish.

You measure by responses.
IE if you have a million users, and only five respond, you have five responses.
Not five, and 999,999,995 no responses.
God bless the Enclave.

*

Rushy

  • 8971
Re: On the Notion of a Tom Bishop Comment
« Reply #32 on: April 13, 2012, 10:21:36 PM »
Then I have nothing but contempt for your useless post.

Should I annotate this response as a negative value point or a zero? You could say zero represents the lack of response, but then how many zeroes would I annotate should someone not respond? How many possible responses would there assumed to be? Should I assume that every registered user on the site could have responded to my post? That is a lot of zeroes! Decisions, decisions.
I am not sure where you get this.
Zero means Zero.
You don't need more than one unless there is a number prior to it.
1000 - 1000 = 0.
Not 0000.
Well, technically it does, but you don't write it like that. That'd be confusing.

Whoooooooosh.

In order to make this even plausibly resemble non-low content, I'm going to note that is the sound of the thought experiment flying over your head.
In all honesty your little "experiment" seems more like gibberish.

You measure by responses.
IE if you have a million users, and only five respond, you have five responses.
Not five, and 999,999,995 no responses.

If I say I have five users, five of which respond in a positive manner, that leaves me with zero still being a possible data point.  Or for example since ClockTower responded negatively, I would place a negative number as the value. Again, that would imply zero as a possibility. What would the zero represent?

?

Graff

  • 538
  • ROBOSCORPIONS ATTACK!
Re: On the Notion of a Tom Bishop Comment
« Reply #33 on: April 13, 2012, 10:29:52 PM »
Then I have nothing but contempt for your useless post.

Should I annotate this response as a negative value point or a zero? You could say zero represents the lack of response, but then how many zeroes would I annotate should someone not respond? How many possible responses would there assumed to be? Should I assume that every registered user on the site could have responded to my post? That is a lot of zeroes! Decisions, decisions.
I am not sure where you get this.
Zero means Zero.
You don't need more than one unless there is a number prior to it.
1000 - 1000 = 0.
Not 0000.
Well, technically it does, but you don't write it like that. That'd be confusing.

Whoooooooosh.

In order to make this even plausibly resemble non-low content, I'm going to note that is the sound of the thought experiment flying over your head.
In all honesty your little "experiment" seems more like gibberish.

You measure by responses.
IE if you have a million users, and only five respond, you have five responses.
Not five, and 999,999,995 no responses.

If I say I have five users, five of which respond in a positive manner, that leaves me with zero still being a possible data point.  Or for example since ClockTower responded negatively, I would place a negative number as the value. Again, that would imply zero as a possibility. What would the zero represent?
I would have two sets of numbers, personally.
Positive replies, negative replies, and of course a general reply tally.
I am not sure why you need zero.
God bless the Enclave.

*

Rushy

  • 8971
Re: On the Notion of a Tom Bishop Comment
« Reply #34 on: April 13, 2012, 10:42:13 PM »
Then I have nothing but contempt for your useless post.

Should I annotate this response as a negative value point or a zero? You could say zero represents the lack of response, but then how many zeroes would I annotate should someone not respond? How many possible responses would there assumed to be? Should I assume that every registered user on the site could have responded to my post? That is a lot of zeroes! Decisions, decisions.
I am not sure where you get this.
Zero means Zero.
You don't need more than one unless there is a number prior to it.
1000 - 1000 = 0.
Not 0000.
Well, technically it does, but you don't write it like that. That'd be confusing.

Whoooooooosh.

In order to make this even plausibly resemble non-low content, I'm going to note that is the sound of the thought experiment flying over your head.
In all honesty your little "experiment" seems more like gibberish.

You measure by responses.
IE if you have a million users, and only five respond, you have five responses.
Not five, and 999,999,995 no responses.

If I say I have five users, five of which respond in a positive manner, that leaves me with zero still being a possible data point.  Or for example since ClockTower responded negatively, I would place a negative number as the value. Again, that would imply zero as a possibility. What would the zero represent?
I would have two sets of numbers, personally.
Positive replies, negative replies, and of course a general reply tally.
I am not sure why you need zero.

Zero must represent something. So, what would it represent? You can't simply omit it because you don't know. Think Graff, think.

?

Graff

  • 538
  • ROBOSCORPIONS ATTACK!
Re: On the Notion of a Tom Bishop Comment
« Reply #35 on: April 13, 2012, 10:44:19 PM »
Zero must represent something. So, what would it represent? You can't simply omit it because you don't know. Think Graff, think.
Zero would represent lack thereof.
If you have two positive comments, and zero negative, you have two comments.
What do you want zero to represent?
It represents zero.
God bless the Enclave.

*

Rushy

  • 8971
Re: On the Notion of a Tom Bishop Comment
« Reply #36 on: April 13, 2012, 10:47:15 PM »
Zero must represent something. So, what would it represent? You can't simply omit it because you don't know. Think Graff, think.
Zero would represent lack thereof.
If you have two positive comments, and zero negative, you have two comments.
What do you want zero to represent?
It represents zero.

Zero what?

Re: On the Notion of a Tom Bishop Comment
« Reply #37 on: April 13, 2012, 10:48:29 PM »
Then I have nothing but contempt for your useless post.

Should I annotate this response as a negative value point or a zero? You could say zero represents the lack of response, but then how many zeroes would I annotate should someone not respond? How many possible responses would there assumed to be? Should I assume that every registered user on the site could have responded to my post? That is a lot of zeroes! Decisions, decisions.
I am not sure where you get this.
Zero means Zero.
You don't need more than one unless there is a number prior to it.
1000 - 1000 = 0.
Not 0000.
Well, technically it does, but you don't write it like that. That'd be confusing.

Whoooooooosh.

In order to make this even plausibly resemble non-low content, I'm going to note that is the sound of the thought experiment flying over your head.
In all honesty your little "experiment" seems more like gibberish.

You measure by responses.
IE if you have a million users, and only five respond, you have five responses.
Not five, and 999,999,995 no responses.

If I say I have five users, five of which respond in a positive manner, that leaves me with zero still being a possible data point.  Or for example since ClockTower responded negatively, I would place a negative number as the value. Again, that would imply zero as a possibility. What would the zero represent?
Another lame argument...

Truth and its recording is not limited by your laziness. Yes, you may need to write a lot down. Yes, you may be able to encode a very sparse matrix efficiently. Yes, there is a concept of a missing data point. Yes, you should record even missing data points.

You already have the census of the population. It's call the member list.



ITT: Rushy doesn't understand the difference between missing data and zero data.
Keep it serious, Thork. You can troll, but don't be so open. We have standards

?

Graff

  • 538
  • ROBOSCORPIONS ATTACK!
Re: On the Notion of a Tom Bishop Comment
« Reply #38 on: April 13, 2012, 10:51:09 PM »
Zero must represent something. So, what would it represent? You can't simply omit it because you don't know. Think Graff, think.
Zero would represent lack thereof.
If you have two positive comments, and zero negative, you have two comments.
What do you want zero to represent?
It represents zero.


Zero what?
Zero what, indeed.
If you have zero comments, that means you have no comments.
Zero represents lack thereof.
God bless the Enclave.

*

Rushy

  • 8971
Re: On the Notion of a Tom Bishop Comment
« Reply #39 on: April 13, 2012, 10:52:40 PM »
Another lame argument...

Truth and its recording is not limited by your laziness. Yes, you may need to write a lot down. Yes, you may be able to encode a very sparse matrix efficiently. Yes, there is a concept of a missing data point. Yes, you should record even missing data points.

You already have the census of the population. It's call the member list.

ITT: Rushy doesn't understand the difference between missing data and zero data.

ITT: ClockTower again sees what he wants to see in my posts and not what is being said.

Zero must represent something. So, what would it represent? You can't simply omit it because you don't know. Think Graff, think.
Zero would represent lack thereof.
If you have two positive comments, and zero negative, you have two comments.
What do you want zero to represent?
It represents zero.


Zero what?
Zero what, indeed.
If you have zero comments, that means you have no comments.
Zero represents lack thereof.

Now we have a conundrum. What would a comment that is neither positive nor negative be represented by?

*

Tausami

  • Head Editor
  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 6767
  • Venerated Official of the High Zetetic Council
Re: On the Notion of a Tom Bishop Comment
« Reply #40 on: April 13, 2012, 10:53:14 PM »
SCVs, read my post a couple of times. Alternatively, and as is more likely the case (although I include the other so not to offend), please stop trolling. It's getting painful to watch.

*

Rushy

  • 8971
Re: On the Notion of a Tom Bishop Comment
« Reply #41 on: April 13, 2012, 10:58:51 PM »
SCVs, read my post a couple of times. Alternatively, and as is more likely the case (although I include the other so not to offend), please stop trolling. It's getting painful to watch.

Your post is quite simply incorrect, which is why is wasn't acknowledged by anyone. I'm provoking real thought from Graff, and ClockTower, being my usual rival, does his routine of bending a post until it looks like something he can argue with.

?

Graff

  • 538
  • ROBOSCORPIONS ATTACK!
Re: On the Notion of a Tom Bishop Comment
« Reply #42 on: April 13, 2012, 11:01:03 PM »
Zero must represent something. So, what would it represent? You can't simply omit it because you don't know. Think Graff, think.
Zero would represent lack thereof.
If you have two positive comments, and zero negative, you have two comments.
What do you want zero to represent?
It represents zero.


Zero what?
Zero what, indeed.
If you have zero comments, that means you have no comments.
Zero represents lack thereof.

Now we have a conundrum. What would a comment that is neither positive nor negative be represented by?
I would say that such would need be represented by a third group.
IE four positive, three negative, one neutral.
Eight comments altogether.
You should make a group as needed.
SCVs, read my post a couple of times. Alternatively, and as is more likely the case (although I include the other so not to offend), please stop trolling. It's getting painful to watch.
But I'm having fun...
God bless the Enclave.

*

Rushy

  • 8971
Re: On the Notion of a Tom Bishop Comment
« Reply #43 on: April 13, 2012, 11:10:44 PM »
Zero must represent something. So, what would it represent? You can't simply omit it because you don't know. Think Graff, think.
Zero would represent lack thereof.
If you have two positive comments, and zero negative, you have two comments.
What do you want zero to represent?
It represents zero.


Zero what?
Zero what, indeed.
If you have zero comments, that means you have no comments.
Zero represents lack thereof.

Now we have a conundrum. What would a comment that is neither positive nor negative be represented by?
I would say that such would need be represented by a third group.
IE four positive, three negative, one neutral.
Eight comments altogether.
You should make a group as needed.
SCVs, read my post a couple of times. Alternatively, and as is more likely the case (although I include the other so not to offend), please stop trolling. It's getting painful to watch.
But I'm having fun...

Well that problem is solved. Lets wait for ClockTower to chime in with his contempt for my posts and his ability to interpret haywire meanings from them.

*

Tausami

  • Head Editor
  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 6767
  • Venerated Official of the High Zetetic Council
Re: On the Notion of a Tom Bishop Comment
« Reply #44 on: April 13, 2012, 11:18:57 PM »
SCVs, read my post a couple of times. Alternatively, and as is more likely the case (although I include the other so not to offend), please stop trolling. It's getting painful to watch.

Your post is quite simply incorrect, which is why is wasn't acknowledged by anyone. I'm provoking real thought from Graff, and ClockTower, being my usual rival, does his routine of bending a post until it looks like something he can argue with.

I was a bit off about where the conversation was at (being too lazy to do more than skim) but the post answers everything you've said. And no, you aren't. You two are trying to back each other into a pseudo-logical corner while ClockTower eats  glue on the sidelines (no offense to CT). There's a difference.

?

Graff

  • 538
  • ROBOSCORPIONS ATTACK!
Re: On the Notion of a Tom Bishop Comment
« Reply #45 on: April 13, 2012, 11:31:23 PM »
SCVs, read my post a couple of times. Alternatively, and as is more likely the case (although I include the other so not to offend), please stop trolling. It's getting painful to watch.

Your post is quite simply incorrect, which is why is wasn't acknowledged by anyone. I'm provoking real thought from Graff, and ClockTower, being my usual rival, does his routine of bending a post until it looks like something he can argue with.

I was a bit off about where the conversation was at (being too lazy to do more than skim) but the post answers everything you've said. And no, you aren't. You two are trying to back each other into a pseudo-logical corner while ClockTower eats  glue on the sidelines (no offense to CT). There's a difference.
It wasn't trolling, as neither party's intention was such.
I was just attempting to follow his train of thought.
He brought a rather interesting and, as he said, thought provoking point.

Then again, it did end on just about nothing...
God bless the Enclave.