What an amazing piece of horse hockey on the front page of the NY Times opinion section (and no I'm not talking about Tom Friedman's piece).
*huge hat tip to RKG for this title.
Showing posts with label in the land of the blind this guy is still a dope. Show all posts
Showing posts with label in the land of the blind this guy is still a dope. Show all posts
Sunday, July 29, 2012
Wednesday, May 02, 2012
Stephen King should NOT be ALLOWED TO VOTE!
Check this genius quote:
"Charity from the rich can’t fix global warming or lower the price of gasoline by one single red penny. That kind of salvation does not come from Mark Zuckerberg or Steve Ballmer saying, “OK, I’ll write a $2 million bonus check to the IRS.”
So my man wants the government to both "fix global warming" and "lower the price of gasoline".
Nice work there, Steve. Your political economy is way scarier than your fiction.
I would like the government to make it never rain and have my lawn, plants and trees still stay green and vibrant. Can't do that with the rich man's charity either, right Mr. King?
"Charity from the rich can’t fix global warming or lower the price of gasoline by one single red penny. That kind of salvation does not come from Mark Zuckerberg or Steve Ballmer saying, “OK, I’ll write a $2 million bonus check to the IRS.”
So my man wants the government to both "fix global warming" and "lower the price of gasoline".
Nice work there, Steve. Your political economy is way scarier than your fiction.
I would like the government to make it never rain and have my lawn, plants and trees still stay green and vibrant. Can't do that with the rich man's charity either, right Mr. King?
Monday, January 09, 2012
Get your money out of PIMCO....
....because its CEO, the ubiquitous Mohamed El-Erian is a nincompoop!
Check out this gibberish in today's WSJ:
"Fat tails"—the technical term for the extremes of an outcome distribution—are risks for any global system that loses its anchors. Economies and markets function differently, companies and households feel unsettled, and policy measures become less effective.
Oh my. Where to begin.
First, "fat tails" is not a "technical term". The technical term is excess kurtosis. Fat tails is the colloquial, layman's term.
Second, fat tails is decidedly NOT a term for "the extremes of an outcome distribution"! The normal distribution is an outcome distribution. It does not have "fat tails". In fact it is the lack of fat tails in the normal distribution that lead so many models to go astray
How can this dude spew nonsense like this and get away with it? He's failing Stats 101. It must be the 'stache.
Finally, the second sentence is even weirder than the first. I cannot make out what he is saying. Is he trying to say that recent events have changed the shape of the "outcome distribution"? Or that when we realized the outcome distribution had fatter tails than was previously thought, people changed their behaviors? The second interpretation at least makes some sense.
Check out this gibberish in today's WSJ:
"Fat tails"—the technical term for the extremes of an outcome distribution—are risks for any global system that loses its anchors. Economies and markets function differently, companies and households feel unsettled, and policy measures become less effective.
Oh my. Where to begin.
First, "fat tails" is not a "technical term". The technical term is excess kurtosis. Fat tails is the colloquial, layman's term.
Second, fat tails is decidedly NOT a term for "the extremes of an outcome distribution"! The normal distribution is an outcome distribution. It does not have "fat tails". In fact it is the lack of fat tails in the normal distribution that lead so many models to go astray
How can this dude spew nonsense like this and get away with it? He's failing Stats 101. It must be the 'stache.
Finally, the second sentence is even weirder than the first. I cannot make out what he is saying. Is he trying to say that recent events have changed the shape of the "outcome distribution"? Or that when we realized the outcome distribution had fatter tails than was previously thought, people changed their behaviors? The second interpretation at least makes some sense.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)