Bayesian Filter (@PageBaltimore) profile picture

Shoes and ships and sealing wax, cabbages and kings

Joined March 2022
Photo by Bayesian Filter (@PageBaltimore)Photo by Bayesian Filter (@PageBaltimore)Photo by Bayesian Filter (@PageBaltimore)Photo by Bayesian Filter (@PageBaltimore)Photo by Bayesian Filter (@PageBaltimore)Photo by Bayesian Filter (@PageBaltimore)Photo by Bayesian Filter (@PageBaltimore)Photo by Bayesian Filter (@PageBaltimore)Photo by Bayesian Filter (@PageBaltimore)Photo by Bayesian Filter (@PageBaltimore)
Bayesian Filter retweeted
When I started following social science stats in 1972, the rank order on most measures was: 1. Orientals 2. Caucasians 3. Chicanos 4. blacks Now, it's totally different: 1. Asians 2. whites 3. Hispanics 4. Blacks
The Asian-white-Hispanic-black rank order for socially desirable outcomes (and the inverse rank order for socially undesirable outcomes) is the norm in the US, including for: Examples of socially desirable outcomes in which this rank order prevails: — IQ and standardized test performance — Average college GPA — Percentage degrees earned in the most cognitively-demanding STEM fields — Law and medical school graduation rates — Household income — Household wealth Below are socially undesirable outcomes in a rank order the reverse of above: — Violent crime rates — Most property crime rates — School disciplinary rates — Antisocial behavior percentage — Divorce rates — Out-of-wedlock birth rates — Single-parent household rates — Obesity rates — Teenage pregnancy rates — Average age of first sexual intercourse Performance in the following areas contains an occasional or slight divergence from typical ranking-order, but never involves Hispanics or blacks rising to the top two spots or Asians and whites falling to the bottom two spots: — Law and medical board professional licensing rates (Asians and whites switch places occasionally) — Personal (not household) income (very slight lead of blacks over Hispanics explained by fact that 1/3 of Hispanics are foreign-born and about 1/5 have incomplete command of English language) — Welfare recipients (Asian percentage is often higher than whites, tied to higher percentage of immigrants) — Scientific innovation and achievement (Whites lead Asians, but gap may be closing) — Mortgage foreclosure rates (blacks and Hispanics switch third and fourth position occasionally, but are always in the bottom two) — Bachelor's degree percentage (blacks have higher percentage than Hispanics Finally, these are major outcomes in which Hispanics or blacks outperform whites or Asians: — Longevity (Hispanic lead over whites is called the “Hispanic Health Paradox”) — Prominence and influence of musical artists (blacks outperform all other groups on a per capita basis, and Asians perform worst) — Athletic achievement in the two most popular American sports (blacks outperform all other groups, and Asians perform worst)
18
61
3
1,552
36,431
Bayesian Filter retweeted
This is why every society since the beginning of time has told you 'get married and have children' btw. Every single thing society encouraged you to have, that you view as 'oppressive', was because your ancestors figured out it was the way to avoid misery.
62
190
14
2,949
66,339
Bayesian Filter retweeted
日本人がRとLの発音を間違って良い日が遂に来た!
Nvidia stock fell 12% because of election and another 10% because of erection
36
1,825
85
11,743
750,828
>Be Me >Worried I'm becoming meaner online >Decide to try and be nicer >Go online >"They've destroyed the bones of Saint Nick"
218
1,643
57
20,706
129,119
My response to AWS after they told me for the second time in three months that I’m not allowed to use their service.
1
36
Believing that the poor are wholesome chungus victims of society who we need to coddle is a bourgeois liberal luxury belief. No one hates the poor more than other poor people, especially the upwardly mobile former poor. They know exactly why poor people are the way they are
Guy who makes $700k/yr: "We should expand public housing, feed the homeless, and give them dignity" Guy who makes $36k/yr: "Every hobo should be sent to work houses until they die"
26
256
4
3,240
42,984
Campaigning on giving everyone a UTI
1
1
548
Do all Chinese people have the same last name?
19
Bayesian Filter retweeted
What is the charge? Enjoying a handler? A succulent Chinese handler?
58
358
13
5,400
124,909
Guy who goes to an extremely upscale Italian restaurant and just orders spaghetti with red sauce.
2
1
51
me and all my guy friends like to get together and trim our beards and try out different colognes and stuff we call ourselves the grooming gang and wouldn't you know it
1
1
49
One of my boys once referred to an "ear whack." What is this? Well you see, it is the singular form of "ear whacks."
1
1
2
42
Bayesian Filter retweeted
seeing some commentary that "girls didn't like Gary Paulsen's Hatchet." I'll have you know that in 5th grade, me and another girl built a 24x36" perfect 3D topographic model of his crash site out of plywood for a class project. we filled the lake in with acrylic and everything
33
33
8
993
19,123
Bayesian Filter retweeted
Only the madman can witness the divine symphony and conclude there is no composer. such folly can only spring from hearts that refuse to bow before the majesty of heaven
昔の人が空を見て神様が居ると思ったのも理解できるな
44
574
15
6,755
95,900
Bayesian Filter retweeted
Dang ol’ Doom
26
727
2
6,260
48,267
Hearing the contempt adult women have for 3rd-grade boys simply because they enjoyed an award-winning children's book really makes you wonder what the male youth of this era are actually going through in school and how their futures are being altered because of that treatment.
The first novel I ever loved was the survival classic Hatchet, but recently I’ve learned that a *lot* of women despise this book, and see it is as something they were forced to read in school to entice the idiot illiterate boys in their English class. I dove into that tension!
220
791
85
9,118
279,573
Vice President Vance is mistaken.  The reason we Republicans lost yesterday is not just the war in Iran.  Yes, the resulting higher fuel prices contributed to the inflation that infuriated Americans who were promised lower prices by this administration.  But the war is not the only cause.  Arbitrary and capricious tariffs directly raised costs for all American consumers.  Lower income Americans can least afford them. Many voted for Democrats yesterday. Tariffs should be a central part, but only part, of the “honest conversation” VP Vance wants Republicans to have about the future of our party.  For instance, we all seem to oppose government-owned grocery stores.  But are we ok with government ownership of semiconductors companies and rare earth miners?  We oppose rent controls.  But do we support price controls on medicines and credit cards? The bigger question is does the Republican party now agree with the left that we need a large, powerful central government to run the economy, allocate capital and control prices? Or, do we believe that free men and women should be able to engage in commerce as they see fit and that a free enterprise system will create a higher standard of living and the greatest opportunities for the most people as it always has? Let’s have an “honest conversation.”
One of the things the data analysts on our side obsessed over was "composition"—whether the electorate looked close enough to 2024 for Republicans to win. And despite polls that showed a Democrat blowout, the data kept on telling us the same story: in some states turnout was merely OK, in other states it was downright amazing, and in no state was it catastrophic. There was a genuine sense of optimism on our team: our people were showing up. So, I asked the smartest data guy I know, does that mean we're going to shock the world? "No," he told me. "We might do better than the polls suggest. But the data is telling us that a lot of Trump/Vance 2024 voters are pissed and planning to vote for the other guys. Our voters are turning out, but they may not vote for us." Well, that looks prophetic now. Our voters did show up. In Florida, for example, the electorate was 9 points more Republican than Democrat, just a couple points worse than 2024. Undoubtedly there were places we could have done better on turnout. But the main problem is not turnout. The main problem is that many people who voted for Trump/Vance in 2024 voted for Democrats in 2026. There will be a lot of infighting and arguing over what happened and why that is. One of the pollsters I really respect told me that our economic messaging wasn’t sharp enough down the stretch. I’m sure that’s true. But the real reason we lost is obvious to almost everyone. Another pollster—one of the smartest people I know in politics, told me yesterday we’d lose the generic ballot by 13 points. I felt negative going into Tuesday, but even I was shocked by this. In his polling, he saw that a lot of Trump 2024 voters were angry and planning to vote for Democrats. He asked those voters who had abandoned us what would cause them to come back on our team. The top four answers, accounting for nearly all of the responses were: 1) End the war 2) Focus on cost of living/inflation 3) Put America First 4) Change our relationship to Israel Our voters showed up. And the above four reasons are why many of them voted for Democrats. This is according to a pollster who nailed the results. While many spent Monday attacking Rachel Campos Duffy for calling for a diplomatic resolution to the conflict, it turns out her political advice was sound. (She’s also a great person.) In the next few months, there's going to be a lot of gaslighting. Expect to hear any number of establishment politicians say the solution to our woes is amnesty. I'm open to the idea that we should change enforcement—by focusing more on businesses that hire illegal labor, for instance. But anyone pushing amnesty is lying to you. The reason we lost is the war. The president himself said so last night. If you'd like to argue it was worth it, that losing the Senate for the next 6 years was worth it, then do so. Argue it was a worthwhile cost to pay. Agree or disagree, that's at least honest. But everyone knows why we lost. And any honest conversation about where we go from here must start there. I remain hopeful about our country. To the people who are pissed off and want to say, “I told you so”: you’re right, you did tell us so. Take that energy into electing Republicans who share your worldview. To the people who are just pissed at the results, you should be. Let’s take that anger and get back to the work of saving our country.
667
608
103
3,881
588,956
Bayesian Filter retweeted
It was not, in fact, just about Iran.
National GOP operative tells me: "People will try to overcomplicate this, but its really simple: This is 100% because of Iran. It's all in the data and has been since a week after the war started. The economic anxiety is directly correlated with the war. We got our asses kicked because of it."
10
97
471
17,596
Bayesian Filter retweeted
the iran war was january through march 2026. this all started april 2025 with liberation day. you cannot run on fixing the economy and then ignoring price increases from tariff policy.
The Iran War is the greatest political blunder in the last two decades at least. A catastrophically stupid decision. An unforgivable betrayal of America First principles.
22
60
12
288
22,279