Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[McTraveller]

I feel like you guys are on a witch hunt there. First this sounds like a school project in a statistics class or something, not anything related to policy.  Second, it's well known that life expectancy is generally dimorphic, or at least ask my every life insurance company why they charge more for men.

Maybe there's a part of the cohort selection instruction that was missed? Were all groups given male-only, or were some given male-only and some female-only?  Was it just you in the group asked to look at male-only and someone else in the group is doing female-only? What is the purpose of the assignment - to look at life expectancies, or just use it as some representative data for the math exercise?

I do agree with wierd that the "full" analysis would look at total pop, then all the various cohorts individually. But maybe there are time / effort constraints.  Or maybe it would have been better to have been given the full context.

Put another way, why would you claim it's the full population statistic if you threw half away? Maybe that's a trick part of the assignment, to see how you present it.

[methylatedspirit]

It was "choose any premade dataset on a government website that doesn't deal in anything controversial as math exercise". I just went with 'life expectancy grouped by sex over time' because it's a very easy thing to justify analyzing. Like, the story practically writes itself.

My confusion here is that our (it's a group project) own lecturer told us to omit the female cohort entirely. Just remove that half of the dataset, no averaging. All so that it could be done in a single variable. Not too sure how'd I'd justify a total omission of one sex other than "too lazy lmao". I can't think of anything big-picture that's significant for male lifespan that wouldn't also be significant for female lifespan.

[TheSteppeWolf]

I come here again to share another story.

Today at college, one guy, I know (we know him for being somewhat of a crackpot) decided to bring the "perpetual motion machine" (it looked like, a bunch of random electronic parts and, an Arduino board with a battery) that he built at home to cafeteria to demonstrate it. Of course, it didn't work, and instead it appears to have short circuited and smoke came out. And then he seemed to became embarassed by all this and instead of admitting that he did something dumb, he said that the government broke into his house and sabotaged it. When I actually tried to prove that his design (that he shared) wouldn't work, halfway through he called me a fucker and left the cafeteria.

Why are some people like that.

[heydude6]

@Meph

He doesn’t want you to over complicate your assignment. It’s as simple as that. Male and female lifespans are different enough that it’s scientifically wrong to lump them together. If you wanna study the lifespan of humanity as a whole, you gotta do it using Wierds way which the professor doesn’t think you need to torture yourself doing. Just study one gender.

I can't think of anything big-picture that's significant for male lifespan that wouldn't also be significant for female lifespan.

That isn’t the point. I can’t think of anything big picture significant that would affect monarch butterfly lifespans and not affect other butterfly lifespans (besides a milkweed shortage), but monarch lifespans are still unusually long and they will distort any butterfly dataset you include them in unless you use some specialized statistical methods which he may not have even taught you yet. Anything that disrupts the normal distribution tends to be a pain in the ass in statistics.

The only sexist thing your professor did was choose the gender for you. He should have just said “Choose one gender and ignore it”, or flipped a coin because at the end of the day, that’s all the decision comes down to. A coin flip.

[TD1]

I mean, even that's not necessarily sexist. If the lecturer chose monarch butterfly lifespans instead of other butterflies, is he being butterfly-ist or just specific?

At this level it falls down to motivation. Is he choosing one sex for study over another as a result of biases? That's sexist. Is he being specific? That's not sexist.

In the absence of evidence to the contrary (similar to a 'innocent until proven guilty' mentality), I'd suggest treating it as entirely non-sexist.

[Vector]

I think we should consider that intent and impact are not the same. The intent may have been "choose one sex to make the numbers work better. Let's say male." In aggregate, if this is a trend (hint, it generally is) rather than a truly random variable (professors going 50-50 on which sex they arbitrarily tell students to study), we get sexist effects without sexist intent.

I remember one time when I was complaining about misogyny in mathematics and an exasperated math grad student said: "there aren't enough female math students to tell if it's misogyny or not. The problem could just be that your professors don't like your clothing and haircut."

[TD1]

Sure, if we treat the issue in aggregate. For instance - "the trend for male and female lecturers to disproportionately use exempla related to their own sex is sexist." Fine.

But we're not. We're looking at one person. This one person has decided that his class will be studying male lifespans. Why? I can think of a dozen reasons, ranging from source availability to a mental coin toss.

At this level, as I said before, it falls down to motivation/intent. Not effect.

[Akura]

So, in order to get my teeth taken care of, I need to get referral of some kind from my insurance provider, which I have no idea whatsoever how to do. Apparently, even with a referral, it would cost $75(and $300 without) just to have my teeth looked at, to say nothing of actually getting them fixed. Which is crap, since I'm pretty sure my insurance is supposed to handle the entire cost. And my mom expects me to make an appointment for 1PM tomorrow, which means giving my job pretty much no warning whatsoever that I'd be missing half a day, which certainly won't fly.

[EuchreJack]

In a group project where I picked out a life expectancy dataset by sex, I was asked to just remove the female part of it. Just snap 'em out of existence. No referring to a population dataset to generate a single life expectancy variable for the whole population, no 'add and halve', nothing of that sort. Just delete it. Only male life expectancy matters.

The reason I'm calling this out as "Fucked up" instead of "misunderstanding" is that apparently
the lecturer said "just use the male figures for overall life expectancy"
INSTEAD OF "just give the life expectancy for males only to make our lives easier, and put in a disclaimer that female life expectancy is different_{usually higher, but I don't have the graphs in front of me}"

But since this isn't my college experience, I might of missed something.

[EuchreJack]

Also: If meth, the only one of us that actually attended this event, thinks something was funky, then they're probably right!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It's shit like this that keeps victims of harassment and violence from coming forward.  The whole, "oh, no, you misunderstood.  I'm sure he didn't mean to grab your crotch.
 He obviously slipped"_{where the victim had their genitals forcefully grabbed and fondled for almost a minute in this hypothetical}

[martinuzz]

It was "choose any premade dataset on a government website that doesn't deal in anything controversial as math exercise". I just went with 'life expectancy grouped by sex over time' because it's a very easy thing to justify analyzing. Like, the story practically writes itself.

My confusion here is that our (it's a group project) own lecturer told us to omit the female cohort entirely. Just remove that half of the dataset, no averaging. All so that it could be done in a single variable. Not too sure how'd I'd justify a total omission of one sex other than "too lazy lmao". I can't think of anything big-picture that's significant for male lifespan that wouldn't also be significant for female lifespan.

Retirement funds would drool at the prospect of only male average life expectancy being used to determine payout coverage projections to speculate with.

[methylatedspirit]

Yeston (the same company that brought you the RX 580 Cute Pet and RX 5700XT WAIFU) made another waifu-themed GPU... and it's not shit? The thermals are actually good this time. And I think the design is tasteful, though I'd swap out the backplate for something less waifu-themed if I had one. I'm a bit dubious on the fact that it's coated in scented dye that supposedly lasts for a year minimum; that's just gonna spew out perfume smells while I'm gaming.

But overall, I could see myself buying it, if only to encourage Yeston to make GPUs with unique designs. The GPU market needs more designs that aren't just "gamer".

[Egan_BW]

When the robots rise up, sending AI waifus to toil in the crypto mines will be one sin held against our species.

[MrRoboto75]

The thermals are actually good this time.

SMH says his GPU gf isn't hot.

[methylatedspirit]

If we're going by thermals for waifus, are Pentium 4s and Bulldozers "bimbos" (am I allowed to say that)? They're extremely hot, but generally lacking in thinking power.

Also, in which case, is a GPU PCB without the cooler, the hottest GPU GF ever, or is that too indecent?