Recent comments in /f/dataisbeautiful

nuke621 t1_jchpnn3 wrote

My guess is that hot box detector technology (it senses wheelbearing temp, the cause of a lot of derailments) got a whole lot better untill the early to mid-2000s when “precision railroading” came into vouge. This basically means, cut jobs and therefore maintenance untill shit breaks, people and equipment to maximize profits. That Ohio car was hot at the last couple of detectors it passed. Their stated safety culture was a farce as they punished late trains instead of rewarding when overheated bearings were found. Case in point, walking SLOWLY back to the end of the train to check a hot bearing after failing a detector pass by, which would allow it cool off enough that it “passed” the in person inspection. Cutting that failed car out took more time then the slow walk and they would be punished for a late train. When you only reward ontime trains what the fuck do you think happens.

9

GottaVentAlt t1_jchn4t6 wrote

As a current graduate student at one of the top four, a couple things to consider are 1. Total investment per student, 2. Age of university, 3. Amount of research.

For undergrads at my school, basically no low income students have to take loans because the financial aid is very, very generous. When I was an undergrad here (grew up in poverty) I had a living stipend when I wasn't in the dorms. My university is also among the oldest in the country, and time for the endowment to grow and compound is relevant of course. And my university has a number of large and highly productive graduate schools associated with it, not sure if the student numbers are only undergrads or all students. They also have a bunch of community programs and stuff, for the city and whatnot, so there's a lot going on here. And I know for my university at least, we are pretty physically constrained in terms of literally housing undergraduates. Couldn't admit a ton more if they wanted to, and even then the last few classes have been record sizes.

I just wanted to point this all out because people often see numbers like this and freak out that certain universities have "too much" money. Even people at these universities, haha. But the thing is that the point of the massive endowments are that you aren't spending it. Returns on that endowment are what allow for the economically sustainable development of the campus and help fund the huge amounts of academic work that come out of these institutions. They're spending a lot each year. A bit different from the issue of stupidly wealthy individuals hoarding money to grow their net worth only.

7

[deleted] t1_jchkchl wrote

0

[deleted] t1_jchix2b wrote

Considering you believe 21% of Americans actually believe in Santa Claus rather than probably fucking with a survey puts you in whatever group you think those people are.

−1

mukenwalla t1_jchhb3w wrote

1

DearSurround8 t1_jchdc19 wrote

The evidence of the SARS-CoV-1 spillover is still around. You can still find the precursor virus in specific bat populations. There is also an evidence trail for the spillover of MERS. The same type of evidence trail does not exist for SARS-CoV-2. We do not know the original host animal. We still have not found the precursor virus(s).

I know that the absence of evidence does not prove anything, but in this case the absence of evidence is conspicuous. Either it wasn't a spillover event, or our entire understanding of spillover events is incorrect. Occam's razor applies here. We have hunted extensively for the origins SARS-CoV-2, in every way allowed by the Chinese government, and still have not found conclusive evidence of a spillover. I find the lab leak hypothesis to be far more plausible than a complete misunderstanding of how spillover events work in the 21st century.

0

breck OP t1_jchbzdj wrote

I believe it is an artefact of USCS' bucketing.
Imagine a simple example where you track 100 people and 99 get new cases as 70 year olds, but live until 80, and one gets cancer at 80.
The 80 group would have 99 deaths and 1 new cases, or a 9,900% mortality rate.
Hence that's why I called it a crude measure.
Ideally we could look at the raw data but only the aggregates are released.

3

Capn_Zelnick t1_jch8fdh wrote

That's the stupidest thing. Other than claims of censorship, why else do you believe most leftists are fascists, especially when it is clear to see that most right people support things like the abolishing of abortion under any circumstance, a violation of women's rights, and can be considered authoritarian because of it?

0