Principia Discordia
Principia Discordia => Techmology and Scientism => Topic started by: Brother Mythos on July 05, 2019, 06:02:59 pm

How much longer till we all die off? 760 years, give or take.
As per the article:
'The most mindboggling controversy in the contemporary philosophy of science is the “doomsday argument,” a claim that a mathematical formula can predict how long the human race will survive. It gives us even odds that our species will meet its end within the next 760 years.
The doomsday argument doesn’t tell what’s going to kill us — it just gives the date (very, very approximately).
When I first came across this idea, I thought it was absurd. A prediction must be founded on data, not math! That is by no means an uncommon reaction. One critic, physicist Eric J. Lerner, branded doomsday “pseudoscience, a mere manipulation of numbers.”'
Here's the link: https://www.vox.com/thehighlight/2019/6/28/18760585/doomsdayargumentcalculationpredictionjrichardgott
Gott, the creator of the prediction technique, calls it “the Copernican method.”
That's a damn good name to build a marketing campaign around, and I would normally dismiss something like this out of hand, except for the lulz possibilities. But, Gott did get his prediction technique published in the prestigious journal Nature.

That's a rather optimistic estimate

How much longer till we all die off? 760 years, give or take.
As per the article:
'The most mindboggling controversy in the contemporary philosophy of science is the “doomsday argument,” a claim that a mathematical formula can predict how long the human race will survive. It gives us even odds that our species will meet its end within the next 760 years.
The doomsday argument doesn’t tell what’s going to kill us — it just gives the date (very, very approximately).
When I first came across this idea, I thought it was absurd. A prediction must be founded on data, not math! That is by no means an uncommon reaction. One critic, physicist Eric J. Lerner, branded doomsday “pseudoscience, a mere manipulation of numbers.”'
Here's the link: https://www.vox.com/thehighlight/2019/6/28/18760585/doomsdayargumentcalculationpredictionjrichardgott
Gott, the creator of the prediction technique, calls it “the Copernican method.”
That's a damn good name to build a marketing campaign around, and I would normally dismiss something like this out of hand, except for the lulz possibilities. But, Gott did get his prediction technique published in the prestigious journal Nature.
I'm familiar with this argument, and it fails because the same reasoning can be used to prove other numbers for the end of the world. For example, civilization has existed for 10000 years so under the copernical principle we might expect it to last for another 10000 years. Anatomically modern humans have been around for around 300000 years, so we might expect another 300000, or we might expect to lasy the average lifespan of an apex predator species, or a keystone species

couldn't you use this technique to predict the end of numbers, themselves?
"i've counted 10,000 numbers, so there's probably, like, 10,000 more"

That's a rather optimistic estimate
That thought also occurred to me, upon reading it for the first time.

couldn't you use this technique to predict the end of numbers, themselves?
"i've counted 10,000 numbers, so there's probably, like, 10,000 more"
As per the article:
“The Copernican principle is normally uncontroversial when applied to an observer’s location in space. Gott’s idea was, why not apply it to a location in time?”
So, if the Copernican principle can be applied to a location space, and extended to a location in time, why not extend it once again to a location on a number line? After all, a number line is kind of a dimensional, spacey thing, isn't it?

The author of this idea used it to "accurately" predict the date of the fall of the Berlin wall. The basic idea is that if you know the age of something, there is a 50% chance that it will end after between one third and three times its current age. I checked the math; it is numerically correct.
However, when the prediction is right, the margins can be huge. If you estimated the lifetime of the Berlin Wall in, say, 1982, the model predicts it will fall sometime between 1989 and 2045. That's not useful.
The model also conflates the idea of being right 50% of the time, and having a 50% chance of being right at any given time. And, when its predictions are wrong, they're hilariously wrong.
Mathematically, this model works just as well for predicting the remaining height of a mountain, based on how far up it you have climbed. For a thousand foot mountain, the prediction will be correct 50% of the time (between 250 and 750 feet). However, at 999 ft, with one foot left to go, it will predict you have between 333 and 2997 feet left. Even assuming you're ascending the mountain in complete fog, and can't just look at the peak, or do trigonometry or something, the only assumption you can make after climbing the mountain X feet is that the mountain must be at least X feet high. The model isn't giving you anything of value.
More examples:
A 6day old baby has a 50% chance of having a total lifespan between 8 and 24 days.
A car with 300,000 miles on it has a 50% chance of lasting another 100,000 to 900,000 miles.
Being right 50% of the time over the range of possible samples obviously does not mean that your model has a 50% chance of being right for any given sample.

couldn't you use this technique to predict the end of numbers, themselves?
"i've counted 10,000 numbers, so there's probably, like, 10,000 more"
Or similarly, "I've already been walking in a circle for three hours, so I have betterthaneven odds of reaching the end within nine hours."

What kind of douchebag calls his method "Copernican"? :lulz:
If anyone knows please let me know, I know I could check myself but its so dumb that I dont want to put effort into it.

What kind of douchebag calls his method "Copernican"? :lulz:
If anyone knows please let me know, I know I could check myself but its so dumb that I dont want to put effort into it.
He's a professor at Princeton. He's on the record as claiming 95% confidence that humans will last more than 5100 but less than 7.8 million years.
The author of the linked article, on the other hand, is trying to sell a book.

What kind of douchebag calls his method "Copernican"? :lulz:
If anyone knows please let me know, I know I could check myself but its so dumb that I dont want to put effort into it.
He's a professor at Princeton. He's on the record as claiming 95% confidence that humans will last more than 5100 but less than 7.8 million years.
The author of the linked article, on the other hand, is trying to sell a book.
Im sorry, I phrased it horribly, I was really tired  what I meant is why would he call it "Copernicus/Copernican method", so what I found was:
"Gott calls his procedure the Copernican method, a reference to Copernicus' observation that there is nothing special about the place of the earth in the universe. Not being special plays a key role in Gott's method."
I dont see any good reason to name it that, beyond marketing and association with an important figure... which says a lot.

Speaking as a mathematician, Statistics is Voodoo Mathematics.

Arise chicken, arise.

Speaking as a mathematician, Statistics is Voodoo Mathematics.
:kingmeh:
If you were an actual mathematician, I would think you might have the ability and inclination to post something relevant to this thread.
I'm betting you're a numerologist, at best.

Speaking as a mathematician, Statistics is Voodoo Mathematics.
Balls. It's computation of probabilities.
It's not stat's fault if you choose to read things into the data that aren't there.

My girlfriend loves statistics, she's good at it, unlike you, or maybe not. Variables muffugah.
EDIT: This post was primarily intended to upset Roger while contributing to the conversation. That said, your idea of "voodoo" is like, actually comprehensible to some.

Speaking as a mathematician, Statistics is Voodoo Mathematics.
Balls. It's computation of probabilities.
It's not stat's fault if you choose to read things into the data that aren't there.
Uh, no. Probabilities is probabilities, and statistics is statistics.
Statisticians don't even consider themselves mathematicians; that's why you see "School of Mathematics and Statistics" instead of "Department of Mathematics" at colleges.
Now the kicker ... Did you ever hear of resampling? Example: You have five people who are each assigned five projects to rate, out of 20 possible projects. Resampling "lets" you figure out how they would have rated projects which they didn't rate, based on the projects they did rate, and the projects that other people rated. This is exactly "reading things into the data that aren't there."
I even heard one statistician call resampling something akin to voodoo mathematics.

Speaking as a mathematician, Statistics is Voodoo Mathematics.
:kingmeh:
If you were an actual mathematician, I would think you might have the ability and inclination to post something relevant to this thread.
I'm betting you're a numerologist, at best.
Check out my reply to Doktor Howl. (And BTW, I got a doctorate in Mathematics and Computer Science.)

Well, this should be fun.

:kingmeh:
If you were an actual mathematician, I would think you might have the ability and inclination to post something relevant to this thread.
I'm betting you're a numerologist, at best.
Check out my reply to Doktor Howl. (And BTW, I got a doctorate in Mathematics and Computer Science.)
Ooh, I got a nibble.
Claiming you have a doctorate means nothing (welcome to the internet). And even if you do have one, I've been around the block enough times to recognize that it's quite possible for someone to hold a PhD and still be a blithering idiot in most respects.
For example, here you are, with your LOL OMG 23 (https://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php/topic,17231.msg1431789.html#msg1431789), and your low (https://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php/topic,18394.msg1431792.html#msg1431792) effort (https://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php/topic,20811.msg1431817.html#msg1431817) shitposting (https://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php/topic,38768.msg1431785.html), while your above reply to Doktor Howl suggests that you lack even a freshmanlevel understanding of statistics.
(Some of us actually use freshmanlevel statistics in our day job. For example, linear regression can be used to perform timing estimation of an OFDM signal in the presence of noise. It's good for other things, too, as long as you recognize its limitations. Not voodoo.)

My girlfriend loves statistics, she's good at it, unlike you, or maybe not. Variables muffugah.
EDIT: This post was primarily intended to upset Roger while contributing to the conversation. That said, your idea of "voodoo" is like, actually comprehensible to some.
Okay, then.
I'll be by to upset you later.

Well, this should be fun.
You knew it was coming.

:kingmeh:
If you were an actual mathematician, I would think you might have the ability and inclination to post something relevant to this thread.
I'm betting you're a numerologist, at best.
Check out my reply to Doktor Howl. (And BTW, I got a doctorate in Mathematics and Computer Science.)
Ooh, I got a nibble.
Claiming you have a doctorate means nothing (welcome to the internet). And even if you do have one, I've been around the block enough times to recognize that it's quite possible for someone to hold a PhD and still be a blithering idiot in most respects.
For example, here you are, with your LOL OMG 23 (https://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php/topic,17231.msg1431789.html#msg1431789), and your low (https://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php/topic,18394.msg1431792.html#msg1431792) effort (https://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php/topic,20811.msg1431817.html#msg1431817) shitposting (https://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php/topic,38768.msg1431785.html), while your above reply to Doktor Howl suggests that you lack even a freshmanlevel understanding of statistics.
(Some of us actually use freshmanlevel statistics in our day job. For example, linear regression can be used to perform timing estimation of an OFDM signal in the presence of noise. It's good for other things, too, as long as you recognize its limitations. Not voodoo.)
I used standard deviation for determining whether people are cheating on water samples. I use stat now to determine carbon molding failure modes.

Speaking as a mathematician, Statistics is Voodoo Mathematics.
:kingmeh:
If you were an actual mathematician, I would think you might have the ability and inclination to post something relevant to this thread.
I'm betting you're a numerologist, at best.
Check out my reply to Doktor Howl. (And BTW, I got a doctorate in Mathematics and Computer Science.)
And then, without warning, Poptard.

:kingmeh:
If you were an actual mathematician, I would think you might have the ability and inclination to post something relevant to this thread.
I'm betting you're a numerologist, at best.
Check out my reply to Doktor Howl. (And BTW, I got a doctorate in Mathematics and Computer Science.)
Ooh, I got a nibble.
Claiming you have a doctorate means nothing (welcome to the internet). And even if you do have one, I've been around the block enough times to recognize that it's quite possible for someone to hold a PhD and still be a blithering idiot in most respects.
I know about blithering idiots in the Internet. (I locked horns with Archimedes Plutonium for about a year.)
In fact, I'm replying to a post by one.
For example, here you are, with your LOL OMG 23 (https://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php/topic,17231.msg1431789.html#msg1431789), and your low (https://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php/topic,18394.msg1431792.html#msg1431792) effort (https://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php/topic,20811.msg1431817.html#msg1431817) shitposting (https://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php/topic,38768.msg1431785.html), while your above reply to Doktor Howl suggests that you lack even a freshmanlevel understanding of statistics.
Oh, so you're using my posts in different contexts to try to insult me here, then. And you forgot to look up my posts to the Visual Pinball forum, and half of my Usenet posts. Non sequitur! (Besides, I figured that's the type of posts that a Discordian forum would be like; I didn't expect stickupyourasstype posts.)
(Some of us actually use freshmanlevel statistics in our day job. For example, linear regression can be used to perform timing estimation of an OFDM signal in the presence of noise. It's good for other things, too, as long as you recognize its limitations. Not voodoo.)
Linear regression is a minimization problem, which belongs to mathematics proper. (I teach it in my linear algebra classes, by the way, which would put it there.) Nothing random about that.
And as for "not voodoo" ... There are TWO definitions of standard deviation (one with N in the denominator, and one with N1 in the denominator). If not voodoo, it certainly suggests the old joke about an interviewer and a shady guy: "How much is 2+2?" "How much do you want it to be?"

:kingmeh:
If you were an actual mathematician, I would think you might have the ability and inclination to post something relevant to this thread.
I'm betting you're a numerologist, at best.
Check out my reply to Doktor Howl. (And BTW, I got a doctorate in Mathematics and Computer Science.)
Ooh, I got a nibble.
Claiming you have a doctorate means nothing (welcome to the internet). And even if you do have one, I've been around the block enough times to recognize that it's quite possible for someone to hold a PhD and still be a blithering idiot in most respects.
I know about blithering idiots in the Internet. (I locked horns with Archimedes Plutonium for about a year.)
In fact, I'm replying to a post by one.
For example, here you are, with your LOL OMG 23 (https://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php/topic,17231.msg1431789.html#msg1431789), and your low (https://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php/topic,18394.msg1431792.html#msg1431792) effort (https://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php/topic,20811.msg1431817.html#msg1431817) shitposting (https://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php/topic,38768.msg1431785.html), while your above reply to Doktor Howl suggests that you lack even a freshmanlevel understanding of statistics.
Oh, so you're using my posts in different contexts to try to insult me here, then. And you forgot to look up my posts to the Visual Pinball forum, and half of my Usenet posts. Non sequitur! (Besides, I figured that's the type of posts that a Discordian forum would be like; I didn't expect stickupyourasstype posts.)
(Some of us actually use freshmanlevel statistics in our day job. For example, linear regression can be used to perform timing estimation of an OFDM signal in the presence of noise. It's good for other things, too, as long as you recognize its limitations. Not voodoo.)
Linear regression is a minimization problem, which belongs to mathematics proper. (I teach it in my linear algebra classes, by the way, which would put it there.) Nothing random about that.
And as for "not voodoo" ... There are TWO definitions of standard deviation (one with N in the denominator, and one with N1 in the denominator). If not voodoo, it certainly suggests the old joke about an interviewer and a shady guy: "How much is 2+2?" "How much do you want it to be?"
https://giphy.com/gifs/BhonfJKJtq5Dq/fullscreen (https://giphy.com/gifs/BhonfJKJtq5Dq/fullscreen)

I know about blithering idiots in the Internet. (I locked horns with Archimedes Plutonium for about a year.)
Never heard of him. But it doesn't matter; my opinion of you is based on your posts here, not on claims of past glory. (Not that arguing with a rando on the internet for a year is something I would brag about).
In fact, I'm replying to a post by one.
Oh, yeah? Well that makes three of us.
Oh, so you're using my posts in different contexts to try to insult me here, then.
I'm estimating who you are from readily available information. If you think the estimate is unfair, post something interesting, funny, or clever, and stop waving around credentials that are twenty years outofdate.
(Besides, I figured that's the type of posts that a Discordian forum would be like; I didn't expect stickupyourasstype posts.)
You joined a forum pertaining to a chaos goddess and it wasn't what you expected? :)
I'll add "too lazy and/or oblivious to spend ten minutes reading the stickied threads before joining a forum" to my model of you.
Linear regression is a minimization problem, which belongs to mathematics proper.
Are you claiming that a method for modelling a random process isn't statistics? Come on, pull the other one.
(I teach it in my linear algebra classes, by the way, which would put it there.)
My god, it's almost like there might be overlap between different disciplines! Could it be possible that linear regression belongs to both statistics and linear algebra? Amazing! :roll:

This is going to end in baboonery. * dude hasn't shown enough inflamed ass yet, he's just warming up.

This is going to end in baboonery. * dude hasn't shown enough inflamed ass yet, he's just warming up.
You know it’s a good day when you can expect MORE inflamed ass to show up by the end of it. I’m just sad I won’t get to watch it live, I have work and shit.

This is going to end in baboonery. * dude hasn't shown enough inflamed ass yet, he's just warming up.
You know it’s a good day when you can expect MORE inflamed ass to show up by the end of it. I’m just sad I won’t get to watch it live, I have work and shit.
Baboonery follows a formula. It's more or less on rails.

This is going to end in baboonery. * dude hasn't shown enough inflamed ass yet, he's just warming up.
You know it’s a good day when you can expect MORE inflamed ass to show up by the end of it. I’m just sad I won’t get to watch it live, I have work and shit.
Baboonery follows a formula. It's more or less on rails.
Dare I say, it follows a pattern we have discovered from observing and registering cases of assburgers in this forum, which follow a linear regression pattern. :fnord:

Welcome to principiadiscordia.com, where mean is normal, and deviation standard.
(I plagiarized that from fortunemod. Not sure where they got it from.)

I’m fucking disappointed. I am off work and there’s no GODDAMN BABOONERY!
Where’s my inflamed ass! I was promised more inflammation and bigger asses, and here I am with yesterday’s stale hemorrhoids! This is a fucking OUTRAGE! :crankey:

*screeches and hurls dung*

Sorry, what was that about big asses?
Because, you know like, damn.

Has he given up already? I was hoping he was good for another couple rounds. :cry:
So much for him lasting a year. He did seem to be on a onceaday posting cycle, so I suppose it's possible he just skipped a day?
I'll dump the ammunition I was saving up, so I don't leave it stuck in my head and presenting a hazard:
Someone who uses an appeal to their authority as a mathematician to justify why they don't understand statistics doesn't come around every day. At least, when I call something voodoo, it's because it's arbitrary, and meaningless, and I don't understand it. A real Discordian would recognize that statistics is just another grid we superimpose on Chaos. You need to pick the appropriate grid for the situation, but that's true of all grids.
When I tell my coworkers "We need a voodoo priest on staff", they understand that I mean "that thing that just happened was weird and scary and it didn't make any sense and I wish someone would make it go away." And maybe I get a laugh or two.
But we don't have the budget to hire a proper priest, so I get the hatchet, Clive gets a goat, and we all put on bloodsplatterresistant ponchos and do what needs to be done.
...well, it's actually a spectrum analyzer or oscilloscope, not a hatchet, and we use ESD smocks instead of ponchos, but the rest of it is real.

I would like to apologize to LMNO. I had A Night of some sort last night, and my anger at insufficient baboonery was apparently the start of a rampage that, at latest count, seems to have affected 5 Discord servers, 3 text message convos, and at least 3 threads here.
I still want to know what happened, all I remember is a grin like a knife fixed in my mind’s eye, and ... then I wake up and there’s a mess spewed all over the place and I’m surprised I didn’t get banned or something. From somewhere else, I mean.

I'm just here to assess the asses.
I'm kind of a fan.

It's not every day that we have a doublePhD kick the doors in. :lulz: < proper use of party hat emote.
Back in MY day, Poptard worked his trolls. We had asses flying all over the place, big and red and horribly stained.
We had to roofie LMNO up until his trip to Montana, on account of the asses making him blurt arcane financial formula all willynilly which corrupted the noobs and made them bleed from every orifice.

Trolls died out, this is the era of assburgers :sad: