EPTUS Politics Mega-thread - Page 2892
| Forum Index > General Forum |
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets. Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source. If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread | ||
|
ShoCkeyy
7815 Posts
| ||
|
pmh
1366 Posts
On December 14 2020 23:29 rope123 wrote: I would probalby agree with you that, if an attempt were to be made to figure out the bayesian probability of a secession to happen (which btw does not equal to a chance of 1 in X), we would come to a low number (not astronomically low though). This of course only holds true if we exclude unknowable probabilities from the equation (which we have to if we want to continue to make predictions and not give up on the matter entirely). What I take issue with is you proclaiming that an alien landing is unlikely. It is not, as of now, it is a black box. As all the factors, that we would need to have a decent understanding of to be able to make a good predicition (likelihood of the development of intelligent life, possibility of interstellar travel, intergalactic travel restrictions set by a federation of advanced civilizations etc etc etc), are more or less unassessable, figuring out a probability is a meaningless endeavour. You wanting to take that bet, does not mean it is rational to do so. Your intiution appeals to your expectations formed by the past alone. That is not sufficient. Another example: Would it be rational to bet against GOD's existence being proven in 2021 or an angel appearing in front of the white house? Yes, it would. From our current point of view neither the concept of GOD nor of an angel makes any sort of scientific sense, so a rational being should not expect their appearance and bet against it. Such a statement cannot be made about an alien landing though. In this matter humility in regard to our predictive capabilities should be the correct state of mind. This thread turned out to be somewhat interesting again. This is a bit off topic and i am not sure if you are trolling or not but ok i reply anyway. "What I take issue with is you proclaiming that an alien landing is unlikely. It is not, as of now, it is a black box Every future event is a black box when it comes to it either happening or not. But that does not mean we can not make more or less accurate predictions about the probability of it happening. It is difficult to see why intuitively it doesnt fully make sense what you are saying but an extraplolation of your alien example maybe can give a glimpse. When you say that an alien landing is a black box event about which no prediction could be made then the same should go for any other event that could potentially be influenced by an alien landing,which are basicly all possible events. Any event that has a certain change could have its outcome altered by an alien landing and that makes any event with certain odds,no matter how trivial,a black box according to your argumentation. I could go with your argumentation but then it should go for any possible event,claiming an alien landing is a black box but accepting there are clear odds for other events i think is contradictory since the outcome of all those events could potentially be altered by an alien landing. Biden won,its official now. What are the odds of Texas seceding? It depends amongst other things on the timeframe. The odds of texas seceding somewhere within the next 500 years are bigger then the odds of texas seceding tomorrow. The same would go for the alien landing example. Maybe we can not say much about those odds but at least we can say that the odds of it happening tomorrow are smaller then the odds of it happening somewhere in the next 500 years. Maybe that could be a starting point in trying to get at least some indication of the odds. | ||
FlaShFTW
United States10237 Posts
GG, hopefully this is the end but I expect Republicans to raise objections when the votes are announced in the Senate. | ||
|
PoulsenB
Poland7712 Posts
| ||
|
HelpMeGetBetter
United States764 Posts
On December 15 2020 07:29 FlaShFTW wrote: GG, hopefully this is the end but I expect Republicans to raise objections when the votes are announced in the Senate. When does that happen? | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands21959 Posts
| ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States45074 Posts
On December 15 2020 07:14 ShoCkeyy wrote: Biden is the official President Elect based on electors today. Oh goodie! I think today is roughly the 40th straight day that Biden has won the election  | ||
|
Nevuk
United States16280 Posts
A source close to Barr called Trump a deposed king clinging to power, which was ironic, coming from an ally of the person who singlehandedly has done the most to enshrine Trump's power. ("Barr cannot be intimidated by Trump. This is the real story. None of this matters -- it's the deposed king ranting. Irrelevant to the course of justice and to Trump's election loss" ) per CNN edition.cnn.com) | ||
|
eviltomahawk
United States11135 Posts
Souce | ||
|
rope123
27 Posts
On December 15 2020 07:26 pmh wrote: This thread turned out to be somewhat interesting again. This is a bit off topic and i am not sure if you are trolling or not but ok i reply anyway. "What I take issue with is you proclaiming that an alien landing is unlikely. It is not, as of now, it is a black box Every future event is a black box when it comes to it either happening or not. But that does not mean we can not make more or less accurate predictions about the probability of it happening. It is difficult to see why intuitively it doesnt fully make sense what you are saying but an extraplolation of your alien example maybe can give a glimpse. When you say that an alien landing is a black box event about which no prediction could be made then the same should go for any other event that could potentially be influenced by an alien landing,which are basicly all possible events. Any event that has a certain change could have its outcome altered by an alien landing and that makes any event with certain odds,no matter how trivial,a black box according to your argumentation. I could go with your argumentation but then it should go for any possible event,claiming an alien landing is a black box but accepting there are clear odds for other events i think is contradictory since the outcome of all those events could potentially be altered by an alien landing. Biden won,its official now. What are the odds of Texas seceding? It depends amongst other things on the timeframe. The odds of texas seceding somewhere within the next 500 years are bigger then the odds of texas seceding tomorrow. The same would go for the alien landing example. Maybe we can not say much about those odds but at least we can say that the odds of it happening tomorrow are smaller then the odds of it happening somewhere in the next 500 years. Maybe that could be a starting point in trying to get at least some indication of the odds. I already conceded this point and also argued that basically any bayesian prediction suffers from this dilemma. Yes, it is probably a valid argument to say aliens landing tomorrow is less likely than aliens landing in the next millenium. It is also true that if we accept that events with an a priori unknownable probability exist any future prediction would be in essence unknowable. But as far as I am aware there is a difference between an unlikely event (meteor landing in 2021) and an unpredictable event (aliens). When we assess the value of a prediction, we look at the reasoning they give for their predicition and have to disregard the "black boxes". Bayesian predictions are in essence more social than mathematical. For example a random person in 2019 would have said: Disregarding black boxes the chances of Olympic Games being cancelled are 3 % and I will give you these odds. Bill Gates - always being worried about Pandemics (and with good reason) - maybe would have put the chances higher at 10 % and given those odds. Then in 2019 we couldve looked at the facts we had available and could have argued among ourselves whose prediction is more convincing. What I am claiming is that nobody can make a convincing argument that goes further than total guesswork regarding an alien landing aside from relying on the (uninteresting and irrelevant) fact that it has not happened yet. So to me saying aliens landing is "unlikely" just is not a valid argument because if I ask: "why?" nobody can give any sound argument beyond "feelings". Tldr we just dont know or understand enough about alien life, travel etc that any prediction claiming it is unlikely that they will show up tomorrow is not an valid prediction because we cant assess the quality of its reasoning. You can argue against the bayesian probabilities of a secession by analysing cultural, economical and political factors. But if you say aliens won't show up tomorrow, next week or next year, your only argument is that it hasnt happened yet. //different example Lets say we make a prediciton about a super volcano erupting in 2021. In this case we have good reason to assume that the probabilities of such an event can be inferred from the regularity with which such a volcano erupted over earth's history as long as the relevant geological factors were comparable. So we can make a sound prediction that the likelihood of this event is rather low. The quality of such a prediction wouldnt even change if we later after an eruption has taken place figure out that it was always inevitable that it would happen in 2021. As long as we didnt have access to the specific fact, that would have told us about the certainty of the eruption, when we made the predicition, it was a valid prediction. With Aliens you can reasonably take any! position. Them not having shown up yet might have very good reasons (e.g. they wait until we reach a very specific technological stage) or it might be an indicator that it is hard for aliens to show up etc. Thus the simple fact that it is more likely that they will show up in the next 1000 years vs the next year vs the next day or minute will on its own never lead to any identifiable "number", nor even to "high" "small" "astronomically small". Only to relative statements like "lower".. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On December 15 2020 08:34 Nevuk wrote: Bill Barr is stepping down, following a series of Trump attacks on him for not having dropped the news about Hunter Biden being under investigation for tax evasion shortly before the election when he had known about it since April (it really wouldn't have mattered : no one gave a shit about Hunter Biden except Trump diehards). A source close to Barr called Trump a deposed king clinging to power, which was ironic, coming from an ally of the person who singlehandedly has done the most to enshrine Trump's power. ("Barr cannot be intimidated by Trump. This is the real story. None of this matters -- it's the deposed king ranting. Irrelevant to the course of justice and to Trump's election loss" ) per CNN edition.cnn.com) https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1338614499981602819 The whole attempt to paint the Hunter Biden computer/emails story as some kind of Russian disinformation would've been smacked down hard if anyone leaked that there was an investigation of over two years into Hunter for Chinese money laundering. If you recall, his former business partner Bobulinski alleged all that back after the story, while confirming the authenticity of the emails. The margins of the Biden electoral win in the states that carried him over was between 0.24% and 1.16%. I wouldn't discount the potential release of corroborating information close to the election. You're a little looney on the "nobody gives a shit." As for the moral side, I've had enough of Comey-style prosecutorial releases near an election, and Barr made the right decision to sit on it. | ||
|
LegalLord
United States13779 Posts
On December 15 2020 07:29 FlaShFTW wrote: California finally verified their results for President. Biden at 303 now. No unfaithful electors surprisingly this year from any state. Clean 306-232. There's no way that in an election as contentious as this one, either party would have left open the possibility of faithless electors slipping through the cracks. They would have taken care to send only the most loyal of party loyalists this time around. | ||
|
Sermokala
United States14048 Posts
On December 15 2020 09:04 JimmiC wrote: He should have a fun book coming out within the year. His is probably the book I'd want to read the most. Not some "resistance" secret operative but the closest thing to a Dick cheany tell all that we'd get. No way he actually writes a book though. He'd save the stories for his clients that he's getting paid by the hour. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15725 Posts
| ||
|
Sadist
United States7291 Posts
This is a classic case of republicans accusing others of what they themselves are guilty of. | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On December 15 2020 10:34 Sadist wrote: The Trump family accusing anyone of money laundering or corruption is rich. This is a classic case of republicans accusing others of what they themselves are guilty of. So long as you can accept the possibility that Hunter Biden could be guilty as sin and the Trump administration can be corrupt as well. You don't have to make a long term prediction if you hold the presupposition that nothing past or present can be as bad as Trump has been over four years. | ||
|
BerserkSword
United States2123 Posts
On December 15 2020 10:23 Mohdoo wrote: MAGAs truly live in a different world. They are all celebrating today, saying the second sets of electors sent by various states will guarantee Trump has another 4 years. Uhhh....did swing states actually send real dueling electors? If they are actual dueling electors then the decision would go to the house, where trump would probably win. The question is whether or not they are true dueling electors selected by state legislature (I don't know if they are) | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
| ||
