2014.04.24 03:06 broovs Circuit Diagrams of Effect Pedals
2011.10.05 03:19 asgard88 Cross section pictures (and videos) of everything!
2022.01.26 06:57 FBI_VAN_1 KME_Sharpeners
2024.05.07 11:25 lampasoftware Approaches to creating line graphs for iOS apps in the SwiftUI framework
Hi, iOS devs! We are Lampa Software, and we want to share another article made by our iOS developer Oleh Didushok. Please let us know in the comments if this article was useful, we'd also be glad to know what article you'd like to read đ«¶đ» (P.S. The github link will be down below đđ») submitted by lampasoftware to swift [link] [comments] ________________________________________________________________________________________________ Approaches to creating line graphs for iOS apps in the SwiftUI framework Photo by Isaac Smith on Unsplash An important component of mobile app development is the creation of informative graphs and charts. Visual representation of data is crucial for conveying complex information to users simply and concisely. Although SwiftUI provides a powerful set of tools for creating screens and user interfaces, until iOS 16, there was no native framework from Apple for working with graphs. Of course, this didnât mean that there was no way to create apps with graphs and charts. There were two ways to create graphs natively (using struct Shapes) or use third-party frameworks. Here are some ways to implement charts before iOS 16:
https://preview.redd.it/v8qov8uu2zyc1.png?width=652&format=png&auto=webp&s=358d73cb93ee4b6166e24c82f87e178b878abd9c We need to develop a line graph using the SwiftUI framework with support starting from iOS 15. Also, we need to minimize the use of third-party frameworks. Given that the specialized Swift Charts framework is only available since iOS 16, we start with the native way via struct Path. Method â1: ShapesSwiftUI provides many powerful tools out of the box, with Shapes being one of them, and Appleâs tools include Capsule, Circle, Ellipse, Rectangle, and RoundedRectangle. The Shape protocol conforms to the Animatable and View protocols, which means we can customize their appearance and behavior. But we can also create our shape using the Path structure (the outline of a two-dimensional shape we draw ourselves). The Shape protocol contains an important method func path(in: CGRect) -> Path: after implementing it, we must return a Path describing the structure of the newly created Shape.Letâs start by creating a struct LineView that accepts an array of optional values of type Double? and uses Path to draw a graph from each previous array value to the next. To determine the boundary dimensions of the graph and calculate ratios, we use the GeometryReader, which will allow us to get the height and width values for superview. These values, along with the func ratio(for index: Int) -> Double method, calculate the location of each point on the line by multiplying the height by the ratio of the individual data point to the highest point (func ratio(for index: Int)). To emulate the input data, we will create an enum MoodCondition that will describe different possible states. Similar to the struct LineView, we will create a separate struct LineChartCircleView. The specified structure also accepts an array of optional values (let dataPoints), and an additional value let radius. The structure draws separate round points with a radius of radius also through Path. We overlay struct LineChartCircleView on struct LineView and get a broken-line graph with points for each value. https://preview.redd.it/q7pqbhm33zyc1.png?width=622&format=png&auto=webp&s=a558a3fd7265eae89c8c1962a4c60bcf1db87e8c It is important to display the X and Y coordinate axes along with the curves, so letâs start with the implementation of the Y axis, namely, by creating a struct YAxisView. The value for the variable scaleFactor will be passed from the parent struct LineChartView, and the offset modifier will list all possible MoodCondition depending on the value of each value and the height of the chart. To construct the coordinate X, create a struct XAxisView. Create an enum WeekDay to display all days of the week on the XaxisView axis. To make the graph easier to use, letâs add horizontal dashed grid lines for the Y-axis, which will correspond to each MoodCondition. To do this, create a separate struct LinesForYLabel. It is important to combine all the Views into one single struct LineChartView, where they will be contained simultaneously:
This way, you can develop any variants and combinations of charts. However, there is an interdependence of each component of the View, for example, the amount of code and the complexity of maintaining and expanding the existing functionality. Method â2: SwiftUIChartsAnother option for building a similar chart is to use a third-party framework, such as SwiftUICharts. Itâs what they do:
First, we initialize the let dataSet model with input data based on values from enum MoodCondition and enum WeekDay. Immediately, we configure the point markers with pointStyle and the model to control the style of the lines with style. We use GridStyle to configure the grid view for the chart and LineChartStyle to add the main chart settings. Method â3: Swift ChartsThe last option for building a chart is the Swift Charts framework.It creates various types of charts, including line, dot, and bar charts. Scales and axes that correspond to the input data are automatically generated for them. We import the framework using import Charts, then create a struct Day function that will correspond to a specific day WeekDay and MoodCondition. Based on the struct Day, we will create a let currentWeeks variable that will correspond to the given week with the corresponding Day. To build the required graph, we use structures:
In the .chartXAxis modifier, set up the axis:
The peculiarity of using Swift Charts is that, with the help of various modifiers, we can quickly create many different types of charts without much effort. The framework is easy to use, supports animation, has a wide range of functions for creating and editing charts/diagrams, and also contains a lot of material on how to work with it. Letâs compare the options for building charts using Shapes, SwiftUIChartsLIbrary, and Swift Charts for a comparative analysis. The result was as follows: https://preview.redd.it/lbmvdg383zyc1.png?width=1179&format=png&auto=webp&s=ebd94b11d947f5213de17bfc36b255646749d89c So, we have tested 3 different options for building diagrams in the SwiftUI environment and such a simple task as building a graph in SwiftUI requires a thorough analysis:
We have created a primitive chart, but even such a simple design allows you to understand all the difficulties that may arise in the future for iOS developers when building charts using the SwiftUI framework.Here you can find this project: https://github.com/OlehDidushok/TestGraphProject?source=post_page-----1cc321a8bbaa-------------------------------- |
2024.05.07 02:35 Professional_Salt301 How does tele 4-way wiring work?
I have this diagram of a 4- way tele, and I want to understand how it works. The switching is: submitted by Professional_Salt301 to Luthier [link] [comments] Position 1: Bridge Position 2: Bridge & Neck Parallel Position 3: Neck Position 4: bridge & Neck Series I have labelled each lug for reference. I think I understand positions 1 & 2, but 3 & 4 are beyond me. I understand how a 4-way switch itself works, I just don't understand the wiring. I know it's hard to explain this stuff over text but if anyone could it would be much appreciated. Cheers. |
2024.05.06 21:50 LaserGuyVII Are these threads real? or fake? Thanks in advance!!!
2024.05.06 17:28 Jackiewilsondesign 2024 Roo Genre Venn Diagram Is Here!
Someone posted last night that no one had done a Venn diagram this year, and Iâve seen multiple ask about it, so I signed up to give the people what they want! submitted by Jackiewilsondesign to bonnaroo [link] [comments] The person who originally did this was not lying⊠it took HOURS to do this. Thanks for the OG diagram again, I used some of the base layout for organizing the genres. It was hard finding an accurate genre to represent people in that also gets the multiple genre artists in their respective genres and fits in the allotted space. Please donât hate me if your favorite artist isnât labeled correctly. I literally did not sleep last night so I could get this done đ and some are really hard to label. (How does one label Four Tet without making a genre space just for him đ?) Let me know if itâs helpful, and if it is, buy me a beer, give me a free hug, or make me some sick Kandi bracelets for the farm â€ïž SEE YALL IN FIVE WEEKS âïž |
2024.05.06 16:37 WhatCanIMakeToday Definitely DIFFERENT "DRS Counts" [WalkThrough] (2/n)
GameStop has been changing the language used to describe their share counts in the SEC 10-K and 10-Q filings. In order to understand the differences, please first read the prerequisite DD DSPP is technically different from DRS [WalkThrough] (1/n) defining what it means to have shares Directly Registered, which has the following TADR: submitted by WhatCanIMakeToday to Superstonk [link] [comments] https://preview.redd.it/2uefybxlctyc1.png?width=2438&format=png&auto=webp&s=bd6ce29413746a6dd703a879de251300dd0865c6 Since Oct 2021, GameStop has used three (3) different phrases in their SEC filings for counting â[directly] registered sharesâ (be sure to read the prerequisite DD defining terms), as follows [1]:
https://preview.redd.it/1ajlqksoctyc1.png?width=1745&format=png&auto=webp&s=ad5c57eec001ab63ff91d43d5288f2b92c8041ad
Title & PossessionThe prerequisite DD introduced the legal concepts of title and possession which can be used to describe GameStopâs various DRS share counts. (If you havenât read it by now, you really should because there will be references to content which may not make sense without the prerequisite context.) Registering shares with the transfer agent, ComputerShare, establishes direct title for record holders.Registered & Record holders have Direct TITLE. No mention of possession. Direct title is very good, but if you recall from the prerequisite DD, âTitle is distinct from possession)â where âpossession and title may each be transferred independently of the other.â [Wikipedia: Title (property))]
As for possession⊠well, what will you do if your wife and her boyfriend drive away in your car during a zombie apocalypse? (I said thereâd be references to content from the prerequisite DD.) DSPP, Possessed?According to the DSPP Plan Brochure, while ComputerShare has a book-entry for registering DSPP Plan Participants as owners of shares (green which represents your title to shares), the actual shares are held either by ComputerShare or in the name of ComputerShareâs nominee (e.g., possession by the transfer agent or not); probably still Dingo & Co (as of last year).https://preview.redd.it/ih48kjyxctyc1.png?width=2756&format=png&auto=webp&s=19e979d0e831d2182efea383f0832022b8ac5bbf Shares held by ComputerShare are at the transfer agent which would qualify those shares as âpure DRSâ, if there isnât any allocated for operational efficiency. However, typically 10-20% of the aggregate DSPP shares are held by DTC (via the nominee) which is not at the transfer agent. (The term âaggregateâ here indicates that all DSPP shares are bundled together into a âpotâ; of which some may be ladled out to be held by DTC. The aggregation, putting all the shares together into a pot, means there's no assignment of whose DSPP shares get ladled out.) https://preview.redd.it/wkt4j515dtyc1.png?width=926&format=png&auto=webp&s=61cf476ff1cd90a11489aa26660e0f451aec166a As registered shareholders, DSPP Plan Participants have direct title to DSPP shares. With respect to possession, DSPP shares are held either by ComputerShare (possessed) or by its nominee; with DirectStock account records at ComputerShare indicating Plan Participants interest in those shares establishing the chain of title. Leveraging the analogy, your car is either in your driveway (possessed) or on your wifeâs boyfriendâs driveway (not in your possession) where its registration card issued by the DMV indicates you have title to the car while your wife says itâs OK for her boyfriend to be driving it (chain of title). In order to make sure shares are properly accounted for, ComputerShare says they use double-entry accounting systems [Wikipedia]. https://preview.redd.it/ubl2gxi8dtyc1.png?width=1199&format=png&auto=webp&s=ba1319ec883acb208b3622efdeb0adca94bdc171 The idea of a double-entry accounting system is simple and very much similar to filling out forms in duplicate (e.g., with a carbon copy) or more: one copy for you and one copy for the other party. This way both sides have a copy and are on the same page. If someone tries to lie, cheat, or steal, the other party can bring their copy to prove wrongdoing. Consider then that DSPP shares, particularly those held in DTC, must be accounted for on both sides. DSPP shares must be accounted for between DSPP and Plan Participants and DSPP shares held in DTC must be accounted for between the DTC and Plan Participants. ComputerShare canât simply hand registered shares to the DTC as then ComputerShare would be short on those shares for Plan Participants. In order to keep the books balanced, when ComputerShare âgivesâ DSPP shares to DTC for operational efficiency, ComputerShare also needs the DTC to âgive backâ the same number of shares for Plan Participants. Iâve previously dissected ComputerShareâs disclosures to annotate ComputerShareâs diagram to more accurately depict the share holding structure for DSPP shares in the following illustration which shows how ComputerShare âgivesâ DSPP shares to DTC for operational efficiency and the corresponding âgiving backâ those shares to shareholders: https://preview.redd.it/uo5160mddtyc1.png?width=3100&format=png&auto=webp&s=a07ae3d74a49f14545143d241dcf66f109da530d
https://preview.redd.it/mo8i7dzidtyc1.png?width=1873&format=png&auto=webp&s=df229a0ae65f45adb650d50edf64f5999d521ffd After DSPP shares go around the DTC roundabout, registered DSPP Plan Participants have direct title to beneficially owned shares in the DTCâs possession via ComputerShare and ComputerShareâs broker. Keep in mind that all shares are essentially treated as fungible in the financial system. While we use convenience terms like âreal sharesâ vs âfake sharesâ and âregistered sharesâ vs âbeneficially owned sharesâ, these are all just simply shares in the system. Shares donât have serial numbers (unless certificated, but thatâs just the certificate having a serial number so that they can be connected back to shares) or any other identifying information. Every share (beneficial or registered, real or âfakeâ) is completely interchangeable for another share (of the same class and type from the same issuer, obviously). As far as ComputerShareâs books are concerned, DSPP Plan Participants have direct title to the proper number of shares, whether the shares are at the transfer agent or the DTC. And while apes may not be a fan of the DTCâs beneficial ownership system, Paul Conn and ComputerShare donât share our concern so direct title to shares held in the DTC doesnât bother them âŠthere is a concern among some investors that if any shares are held in DTC, that that must be a bad thing. I'm not sure we subscribe to that point of view,... [YouTube around 38s mark]By contrast to the registered DSPP shares where Plan Participants only have direct title to shares potentially with indirect possession of shares through the DTCâs beneficial ownership system, holders of pure DRS shares have both direct title and direct possession of shares. Clearing ConfusionThe concept of separating title from possession for property may not be well known or familiar to everyone and, I suspect, is a huge fundamental source of confusion that has (until now) been unaddressed and unidentified. Here are a couple (hopefully) relatable examples to illustrate this concept to help clear up confusion:Example 1: Your Wifeâs Boyfriend Driving Your Car Imagine your wife and her boyfriend are speeding down Loverâs Lane when theyâre pulled over by a cop. The cop will ask for license and registration because those two documents identify who is in possession of the car (i.e. your wifeâs boyfriend as the driver) and who is the registered owner with title to the car (i.e., you), respectively. Example 2: Your Home Imagine you are renting your home. As a renter, you probably tell people the place is âyoursâ because you have possession by renting even though your landlord is the owner with title to âyourâ home. This is an example where we use the term âyourâ to refer to having possession without title. At the same time, if someone were to ask your landlord if the place you rent is theirs, your landlord would also say yes. Me to Your Landlord: Is that your place where the ape lives?In this case, the same term âyourâ refers to having title without possession. Which means that two different parties, you and your landlord, can simultaneously claim ownership of your home depending solely on having either title or possession; without needing both. Applying this to our GameStop stocks, we can see how various statements people thought were conflicting can all be simultaneously true depending on how ownership is viewed: by title and/or possession. Our DSPP shares at ComputerShare arenât lent out, per ComputerShare. This is true. Our DSPP shares are in the name of ComputerShare or their nominee with a book entry for Plan Participants giving direct title to shares which are in the possession of (i.e., held by) ComputerShare or their nominee. And, ComputerShare isnât lending our DSPP shares because (a) the shares are in the name of ComputerShare or their nominee and (b) lending is different from holding shares in the DTC âfor operational efficiencyâ. As soon as the DTC has possession of DSPP shares (i.e., âheld [] in DTCâ per ComputerShare), the DTC can do whatever they want with âtheirâ shares by possession which might also be âyourâ shares by title. Compounded by the fact that shares are fungible, nobody has any f\ing clue who owns what in this system.* Fun Fact: After financial markets nearly collapsed in 1970 after billions in securities Failed To Deliver, SIPC was created to restore trust by providing insurance to investors whose "securities may have been lost, improperly hypothecated, misappropriated, never purchased, or even stolen" [Wikipedia]because nobody trusted Wall St so insurance was created to engender trust without fixing the problems. [DD] Sound familiar? Anyway⊠In order to keep ComputerShareâs books balanced, the DSPP shares held in DTC (i.e., DTCâs possession) must make their way back to ComputerShareâs broker to hold for the benefit of ComputerShare who holds shares for the benefit of Plan Participants (i.e., to match title). Question: What âoperational efficiencyâ benefit is gained by ComputerShare giving possession of registered DSPP shares to the DTC to hold which just ultimately end back at ComputerShareâs broker (who isnât lending out shares) for the benefit of ComputerShare for the benefit of Plan Participants? Why are X number of registered DSPP@DTC shares going into this DTC black box just so that X number of beneficially owned shares end up at ComputerShareâs broker FBO ComputerShare FBO Plan Participants? đ€ This roundabout âoperational efficiencyâ exists for a reason, why? How? (Best leave these topics for another DD post⊠feel free to comment!) Counting By Title and/or PossessionNow that we have a better understanding of title and possession, we can apply those concepts to our table of definitions from the prerequisite DD, DSPP is technically different from DRS [WalkThrough] (1/n), to label the 3 characteristics of directly registered shares as relating to title or possession:https://preview.redd.it/hlguufuxdtyc1.png?width=1103&format=png&auto=webp&s=d017a66604e30921a72d8278973d1baaede6c169
https://preview.redd.it/2j1v6n7tdtyc1.png?width=1871&format=png&auto=webp&s=86443d640c888ca6948f10d75568870943cb9c01
NOTICE: If thereâs no operational efficiency with zero DSPP shares at DTC, then DSPP@DTC=0. Without operational efficiency, DRS+DSPP@CS+DSPP@DTC(0) is the exact same as DRS+DSPP@CS so the phrases âheld by record holdersâ and âheld by registered holders with our transfer agentâ would result in the exact same count; if thereâs no operational efficiency. The only reason to differentiate the two counts with two different descriptions [2] is because there is operational efficiency so DSPP@DTC must be non-zero resulting in two different counts. (Otherwise, GameStop wouldâve just kept with the same âheld by record holdersâ wording.) We will delve more into the importance of this in another DD post. TADRAs title and possession are separate and may each be transferred independently of the other, we can distinguish between âstreet nameâ, âregisteredâ, and âdirectly registeredâ shares by how the holder has title and/or possession of their shares. Registering shares establishes title, which does not necessarily imply possession. Registering shares with the transfer agent establishes direct title. Directly registered shareholders have both direct title and direct possession.We can visualize those different share holding methods with GameStopâs 3 different âDRS Countâ descriptions: https://preview.redd.it/fv6yj002etyc1.png?width=4698&format=png&auto=webp&s=71877277fb70c995c7927f8e8d444e0bf4c131d5 GameStop has used 3 different phrases in their SEC filings for counting shares which can be described in terms of title and/or possession as follows:
And, as a result of the language in GameStopâs SEC filings changing over time, we can determine that DSPP@DTC is non-zero (i.e., DSPP@DTC > 0) meaning operational efficiency is occurring; even though we donât have any idea (except for Paul Connâs âtypically 10-20%â statement) how many shares are used for operational efficiency for GameStop⊠yet. Other Posts In This WalkThrough Series[1] For reference, here are the "DRS Count" statements from the 10-K/Q filings available from EDGAR:
https://preview.redd.it/gzcrilv9etyc1.png?width=2438&format=png&auto=webp&s=2f344198617acb63d1a0beb43b12d235372ee6f5 [2] There is a âPresumption of Consistent Usage (and Meaningful Variation)â which is a relevant âCanon of Constructionâ here in understanding terms, especially in law. The presumption is simple: legalese is confusing so it helps to understand a word salad of legal jargon if the same words are presumed to have the same meaning throughout and using a different term (i.e., a variation) suggests a different meaning is intended. https://preview.redd.it/n371sckdetyc1.png?width=640&format=png&auto=webp&s=dde43f81ef077726d6bfbc716ccaf100cfa1e317 The presumption of meaningful variation says âdirectly registered with our transfer agentâ, âheld by record holdersâ, and âheld by registered holders with our transfer agentâ each have a different meaning. |
2024.05.06 14:18 Popoma183 [Grade 12 Maths: Arrangement] i feel like i did it correctly but my answer(26) is different from the model answer(28)
submitted by Popoma183 to HomeworkHelp [link] [comments] |
2024.05.06 10:22 gtfomf_ guys p6 bio help drawing
am i suppose to shade in those cells, can someone pls give full details on the drawing submitted by gtfomf_ to igcsenotes [link] [comments] |
2024.05.06 05:16 constanning [AP Physics 1] Atticus(?) Machines
I'm getting different answers than the textbook solution and my textbook didnt provide an explanation for this question. submitted by constanning to PhysicsStudents [link] [comments] Heres the problem: You are supposed to find the tension of rope(s) and the acceleration of the system: You are given that M=1.0kg and the friction coefficient is 0.2 you are supposed to use g=10m/s^2 https://preview.redd.it/7fs4kp8y1qyc1.png?width=1080&format=png&auto=webp&s=d88e595bc5e0302d55c0cf5e4819ac0eb502222d The textbook answers are: a= 0.22m/s^2 T2=20N T1=29N (T1 and T2 might be swapped, the textbook didnt label anything lmao) The textbook is a little sloppy with sig figs and rounding however, i got a=~2.4m/s^2 and I can't figure out where I'm going wrong i noticed that if I plug in their value of a into my equations, i get the right tensions heres my work for reference-sorry if its a little messy (i stopped solving for tension after noticing my a is wrong) https://ibb.co/YQtnR7w (sorry reddit wont host the image for some reason) random sidenote: are my diagrams/work okay for the Ap exam? or will i got docked points for drawing it wrong or something? thank you all so much! |
2024.05.05 14:56 itsbernie81 Future Greater Sydney Rail Network Diagram
With the soon-to-open Metro extension to Sydenham via the City, there's been a bit of chatter about the new diagram. Since we're in a future looking state in mind, I wanted to share my take of other extensions that I consider will complete the network, and how I would represent the network in a diagram format. submitted by itsbernie81 to SydneyTrains [link] [comments] Higher resolution version (and more details of the project) here: https://www.behance.net/gallery/197247589/Greater-Sydney-Rail-Network-v92 Approach to the diagram
A closeup of the Sydney diagram Metro
|
2024.05.05 13:58 troppytumb Anatomy of America-Style Axe Head
submitted by troppytumb to OffGridLiving [link] [comments] |
2024.05.05 03:24 gamma647 Help with Technic Plug & Play amp Harness
2010 bmw 328i Base stereo; no tweeters, no amp submitted by gamma647 to E90 [link] [comments] I have recently received the Technic 2/4 stereo harness and an alpine Mx-f30 4 channel amp with speaker level input harness (harness with white connector). I also have bimmertech PnP fronts and subs coming but will change those out with stock speakers once they arrive. I am trying to plan this out before going and taking out all the seats and panels. Here is my Alpine speaker level input harness: ![img](688ngrrzbiyc1 "White = left front + white/black = left front - grey = right front + grey/black = right front - Green = right rear + Green/black = right rear - violet = left rear + violet/black = left rear -") Here is what I can gather from reading the labels on the wires of the Technic cables/wires: L4WF#1 - Long 4 Wire Female #1 (red,black,white,white/black) ![img](rf8l24qfciyc1 "White = Left Front+ White/black = Left Front- Red = 12v Black = ground") L4WF#2 - Long 4 Wire Female #2 (blue,blue/black,grey,grey/black) ![img](hugvt9h5diyc1 "Grey = Right Front+ Grey/black = Right Front- Blue = antenna Blue/black = not labeled") L2WM#1 - Long 2 Wire Male #1 (red,black) ![img](e9b9nya9diyc1 "Red = not labeled Black = not labeled") L2WM#2 - Long 2 Wire Male #2 (white,black) ![img](gkq9928cdiyc1 "White = not labeled Black = not labeled") S2WF#1 - Short 2 Wire Female #1 (white,black) White = not labeled Black = not labeled S2WF#2 - Short 2 Wire Female #2 (black,red) Red = not labeled Black = not labeled S2WF #1 & 2 I can only assume it would hook up as follows: Unplug 4 wire males from both subs. Attach Technic Long 4 wire Females to the BMW 4 wire males and run both Long 4 wire cables (L4WF) to the trunk hooking them up to the alpine harness as such: L4WF#1: TH white Front Left+ > Alpine white Front Left+ TH white/black Front Left- > Alpine white/black Front Left- TH Red 12v > alpine power??? TH black ground > alpine ground??? L4WF#2: TH grey Front Right+ > alpine grey Front Right+ TH grey/black Front Right- > alpine grey/black Front Right- TH blue antenna > ??? TH blue/black > ??? Then plug in the Long 2 wire males into each sub and run to the trunk and attach to the alpine speaker harness as such: L2WM#1: TH red > alpine green Rear Right+ TH black > alpine green/black Rear Right- L2WM#2: TH white > alpine violet Rear Left+ TH black > alpine violet Rear Left - This would give me the 2 front mids and 2 under seat subs going to my speaker level input harness but leaves the Short 2 wire females and the blue & blue/black wires that Iâm unsure of what they are used for. If you've ever installed the 2/4 harness any info would be greatly appreciated as there is no documentation/wire diagram written for this harness. |
2024.05.05 03:04 Traditional_Sir_6800 Newbie cashier
2024.05.05 01:26 dcmetro7 I am slightly skeptical of Kennedy's new poll
hello $2.90 stock image from https://www.shutterstock.com/image-vectopeople-shaking-hands-vector-handshake-two-234189016 submitted by dcmetro7 to AngryObservation [link] [comments] Robert Kennedy Jr. is running for president as an independent candidate. He wants you to know he's serious, and that's he's not a spoiler. You know, that thing he called Ralph Nader in 2000? He's not that. He's going to win. And he's got the numbers to back it up, with a sleek new video to explain it all. He's got a gambit planned, to take Biden off the board with the cold and unfeeling hand of hard facts. Disclaimer: I know that it is the job of Kennedy's campaign to make the optimistic pitch for Kennedy's chances. But since the optimistic pitch for Kennedy's chances is misleading and wrong, we should hold accountable the people who say misleading and wrong things. Um, Nerd Alert!!!1Kennedy's campaign recently released this video to explain the Big News, starring 'Director of Content' Jonathan Hiller. Hiller wants you to know that he's a bit of a nerd. A numbers guru. A đ€, hold the âïž. He just loves diving into the data and seeing where it leads, in a fair, even-handed manner. Let's explore the numbers with our new friend Jon.i can assert with 95% confidence that this man still says 'amazeballs'
First of all, he tries to dazzle the audience with numbers. It is true that most polls have sample sizes between 1,000 and 5,000 people, and it is indeed true that 25,000 is a larger number than either of those numbers. But sample sizes of around 1,000 have become the standard for offering a reasonable degree of precision -- a sample of 1,000 people from America's population of ~330,000,000 results in a margin of error of +/- 3%; this means, in simplified terms, that there's a 95% chance the real value is within 3 points of the poll's result. Why not use larger samples for issues of national importance, and have lower margins of error? In the words of Columbia stats professor Andrew Gelman, 'such larger samples generally a waste of time because public opinion varies enough from day to day that it is meaningless to attempt too precise an estimate. Indeed, to do so would be like getting on a scale in the morning and measuring your weight as 173.26 pounds.' To assert that level of precision six months out from an election is even less meaningful. For this reason, high-quality pollsters tend to focus on high-quality random samples to reduce bias, and thoughtful weighting techniques to make that sample as representative of the general population as possible. In short, quality trumps quantity; a well-designed study of 1,000 participants is superior to a shoddily-designed poll of 25,000. Put a pin in this. Second of all, and more importantly, this is not how polls work, and this is not what the word 'accurate' means. In statistics, the words 'accurate' and 'precise' have distinct definitions, and statisticians are generally extremely careful to distinguish between the two. if you know a Director of Content, please show them this diagram before it's too late Accuracy is 'a measure of trueness or bias, how close the average value of your results is to the true value.' while Precision is 'measure of variability or repeatability, or, how close your results are to each other.' A low margin of error suggests high precision, as you'd expect future surveys conducted with different samples to give very similar results. But you cannot call this, or any other poll today, 'accurate,' because accuracy depends on one thing -- the closeness of your result to the true result. You know, the election that hasn't happened yet. Maybe they should have had their Director of Statistics make this video instead.
First of all, winning with 294 of the Electoral College votes would indeed be a historically close election. Winning 54.65% of the EC would result in the 9th-closest presidential election, in terms of percentage of the EC as a whole, in American history, sandwiched between Grover Cleveland's 1884 victory (which turned on just over a thousand votes in New York) and Jimmy Carter's win in 1976 (less than a two-point shift in just Ohio and Wisconsin would have flipped it to Ford). Second of all, the EC margin does not accurately reflect the closeness of the election. You don't need to be a 'political nerd' to know this -- both 2016 and 2020 saw the victors winning 306 EVs (or 'not very close,' as Hiller calls it), but the elections came down to tiny margins in a few swing states. Trump swept the decisive states of WI, MI, and PA by less than a point each to win, while Biden's victory hinged on a 1.2-point victory in Pennsylvania.
the Oogie Boogie pollAt the bottom of that spoiler page from earlier, Kennedy provides three documents for us to peruse; two related to the poll by John Zogby Strategies, conducted between 4.13.24 and 4.21.24, and a powerpoint expounding on the poll. Let's take a look at this vaunted pinnacle of human forecasting achievement, also known as 'THE most accurate predictor of the 2024 election that we have thus far.'I'm just going to give you a list of some of the more interesting state predictions this poll makes of a 2024 head-to-head between Trump and Biden, compared with how those states voted in 2020. State 2024 Zogby prediction 2020 result projected swing Utah R+2.7 R+20.5 D+17.8 Rhode Island D+4.6 D+20.28 R+16.2 Maine R+1.7 D+9.1 R+10.8 North Dakota R+18.8 R+33.4 D+14.6 Vermont D+21 D+35.4 R+14.4 Arizona R+11.6 D+0.31 R+11.9 Oregon D+3.9 D+16.1 R+12.2 Arkansas R+6.6 R+27.6 D+21 Oklahoma R+13.1 R+33.1 D+20 New York D+5.8 D+23.1 R+17.3 Virginia R+0.5 D+10.1 R+10.6 Missouri R+5.5 R+15.4 D+9.9 Indiana R+4.1 R+16.1 D+12 Now, maybe these are actually the leaked 2024 results. Maybe this is 'THE most accurate predictor of the 2024 election that we have thus far.' Maybe Traditional Democrats will power Biden to a twenty-point swing in Arkansas. But I am slightly skeptical that over a dozen states will swing by double digits in what appear to be entirely random directions. Reasonable people may ask what the hell happened here. When you actually look at the poll itself, in the other document, an issue becomes clear from the very first page. Remember that '25,000 respondents' thing? Here's how they did it. https://preview.redd.it/z3hbhxh6nhyc1.png?width=1146&format=png&auto=webp&s=fc931c2650217e13912a8196b6021d8ddaadc719 This was not a poll of 23,683 people, as the title suggests (which is less than 25,000 -- I guess counting isn't a skill expected from a Director of Content either); it's 50 polls, each with a sample size of around five hundred people. Remember when the campaign was dunking on those inferior polls that only had a thousand participants? Those unacceptable 3% margins of error in most regular polls? Every single mini-poll in this set falls below that mark. The lowest margin of error in this whole set comes for New York, with its n=740 for a population of 19.7 million clocking in at around 4%. This poll reminds me of the villainous Oogie Boogie from The Nightmare Before Christmas, in that it appears to be a unified and formidable presence, but when its seams are pulled, it is quickly revealed to be a sham composed of many tiny, pathetic components. But that still doesn't explain how these numbers are so off. Look at some of these numbers -- Utah and Virginia as swing states. Missouri, Arkansas, and Oregon all close. You thought Democrats sweeping Arizona in the midterms would prevent them from a double-digit crash in the general? This is normally where I'd look into the methodology, to see if there are any glaring errors that could result in these mistakes. But that turned out to be hard to do, as the poll only has the results. The only hint at the methodology comes from the title -- 'Interactive Survey of US Voters.' Interactive surveys usually use gamified elements ot hold the attention of the participants and convey the questions in a novel and easy-to-understand way. But obviously, when getting creative with your survey questions, you need to be extremely careful not to make design choices that will push users towards one option. And it seems like we'll never know what choices Zogby and co made. When reading about Zogby, I quickly found that they're not the most reputable name in polling. Zogby is an old poll -- so old that Nate Silver called them the 'worst pollster in the world' in 2009, in which he criticizes their shoddy metholodogy for their online-based polls. Silver points out that, in 2008, Zogby had Obama favored in Arkansas, which other pollsters did not even consider possible (Obama lost AR in 2008 by twenty points) and had Obama close to victory in Oklahoma (he would lose it by over thirty.) Add on several misses in 2006, and it seems like Zogby's record of huge misses and secretive methods goes back a long way. If I worked for Kennedy's campaign, I might have commissioned them for this poll on their shoddiness alone, in the hopes of producing such an inexplicable poll to justify an unjustifiable campaign. The powerpoint of desperationIn case that Hard Evidence didn't convince you, Kennedy's got one more arrow in his quiver: a good, old-fashioned slide deck laying out the case for Junior. And this thing is the cherry on the sundae. This is the document that convinced me that there is not a single person at the Junior Table who cares about the responsible use of statistics or avoiding misleading narratives. We have...a PragerU graph -- that is, a visual that appears to convey quantitative data but, upon further inspection, contains no labeling or metrics that would allow a viewer to understand the numbers themselves. The only real takeaways are that RFK is in the Good Corner and Joe Biden is in the Bad Corner. Junior pulls the old Truncated Axis trick, starting the Y-axis at a very high value to make the increase in this value look more pronounced than it is. Also, the year labels should be on the graph itself, rather than having to assume anything from the sources. A table implying that Kennedy is more popular based on his website user data. This is misleading because voters know what Biden's policies are because he's been the president for the last four years. Voters don't know what Junior's policies are because few people knew who he was until recently. https://preview.redd.it/so4sruc83ayc1.png?width=1392&format=png&auto=webp&s=05e491558d28b35b4f6863aee3be1fdf6f5f79b2 When I saw this last image, I was a little confused. A 28-point gap in the popular vote is absolutely unheard of. It would outstrip Harding's 26-point margin over Cox in 1920, the biggest popular vote landslide in a contested election ever. And a sample size of 56,000? Apparently replicated by two separate pollsters, with the same results? I was unaware that TMZ had decided to dive into the polling space. The only polls I was ever aware TMZ did were those little web polls beneath their articles. Surely he's not talking about that. https://preview.redd.it/qcg9ns5f3ayc1.png?width=697&format=png&auto=webp&s=37670b224047a7f4dd31e99cb041861e5e866541 Oh. It's an opt-in website poll, the example every high school statistics teacher uses on the first day to demonstrate how meaningless data can be used to mislead people. And perhaps Junior's campaign should have checked the polls again, because their guy is apparently losing to Joe. by the transitive property Biden will win a 49-state landslide As for the supposed corroboration on the 64-36 number on Zogby, I have no idea what they're talking about. It asserts the presence of an n=56,000 poll from Zogby conducted in May 2023, but was apparently only reported on by TMZ in 2024. I can find no evidence of this n=56,000 poll anywhere, and TMZ has a grand total of 1 article even mentioning the term 'zogby' on their site, and it's from 2006. And furthermore, if they had a huge-sample Zogby poll showing Kennedy winning in a landslide, why wouldn't they show that one off instead of the n=25,000 one they're bringing up now? Genuinely, the most likely outcome seems to be that they just duplicated the poll because the people who made this slide deck either have no inclination or no ability to actually fact-check anything they publish. Who cares?I know what you're thinking. Who cares? Biden isn't going to drop out and endorse Kennedy, and this is the kind of insane moonshot thinking you expect from longshot third-party candidates. And furthermore, most of his base are the kind of disaffected voters who wouldn't necessarily vote if he weren't on the ballot. And he might take more from Trump than Biden anyway. And that's all true, but I still think it's important to point this out.Kennedy is a scammer. He's raising the hopes of people who will inevitably be let down. He's using slickly-edited videos and official-looking documents to scam voters who don't know a lot about politics into giving him their money, their time, and their support, all to support a vengeance-driven campaign sprouted from the rotting ego of a blue-blood who has accomplished nothing of value in his seventy years on this planet and yet demands that tens of millions of people roll out the red carpet for him and acclamate him, in reverance of the one thing of note he has: his name. And I hate scammers. That's all. |
2024.05.04 21:57 TheSmogmonsterZX Black Sheep Family - Interlude 9 - Date Night: Valentines
2024.05.04 17:40 michelle0270 Is it data labeling or data mapping?
2024.05.04 08:18 Commercial_Fly_379 PLS HELP, 9701 chem p4 question
why is it NH2, and not NH3+ when you hydrolyse this compound submitted by Commercial_Fly_379 to alevel [link] [comments] https://preview.redd.it/tfjntzlbrcyc1.jpg?width=540&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=6aaef0435097bb0974ae6113cfa95b38f674fd40 |
2024.05.04 04:11 kdg4 Ice-Air RSU PTAC installation
Ice-Air label | Ice-Air description | Ecobee terminal |
---|---|---|
R | Red/24VAC | Rc |
C | Black/Common | C |
COOL | Yellow/Y1 | Y1 |
F1 | Green-G1/Low-cool | G |
F2 | Blue-G2/Med-cool | Y2 |
F3 | Orange-G3/High-cool | W2 |
H1 | White/Heat | W1 |
H2 (not in use) | - | - |
P | Brown/Pipe sensor | - |
G | Purple/G | - |
RT | Grey/Room temperature | - |
2024.05.04 00:16 John-Sedgewick-Hyde VERY concerning (verified) social media post about Trails Carolina and a labeled map/diagram đșïž of the Lake Toxaway, NC campus (from another verified internal source)
submitted by John-Sedgewick-Hyde to troubledteens [link] [comments] |
2024.05.03 21:32 ReverendBlind The Best Brown Bomber I Ever Received
2024.05.03 17:50 BeastMaster_101 ESP32 S3 Devkit SPI connection to RX5808
2024.05.03 17:37 BeastMaster_101 S3 Devkit SPI connection to RX5808
2024.05.02 23:43 Dizzy-Screen-6618 Investigation Recap!