why that was nice

[faulkton 5,000+ posts]

I'd like to add.
When calculating the correlation of two variables containing their own obvious secular trends, the interannual correlation characteristics between the two variables may be distorted (overestimated or underestimated). Numerical experiments in this paper show that if two variables have opposite secular trends, the correlation coefficient between the two variables is reduced (the positive correlation is underestimated, or the negative correlation is overestimated); and if the two variables have the same sign of secular trends, the correlation coefficient between the two variables is increased (the positive correlation is overestimated, or the negative correlation is underestimated). Numerical experiments also suggest that the effect of secular trends on the interannual correlation of the two variables is interchangeable, that is to say, as long as the values of the two trends are not changed, the two variables interchange their positions, and the effect of the secular trends on the interannual correlation coefficient of the two variables remains the same. If the two variables have the same-(opposite-) sign trends, the effect of secular trends on the interannual correlation coefficient is more (less) distinctive.

Cliff Notes: you are a ****.

//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif

Except i knew what the fukk i was talking about and you just used google //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/laugh.gif.48439b2acf2cfca21620f01e7f77d1e4.gif

http://www.iop.org/EJ/abstract/1009-1963/15/9/046

 

[azimuth 5,000+ posts]

man, this is like algebric grammar. -'s cancelling out -'s and x = y. you guys should be politicians. you have their language pegged.

 

[faulkton 5,000+ posts]

i win!

 

[elementxero 10+ year member]

If you can't handle your drugs don't do them, why lash out at those of us who can? There is no point in turning on your fellow man because you feel inferior.

Some people just shouldn't do drugs, their mental climate is too high-strung. That's the way the cards are dealt sometimes. Hell, as a responsible drug user I know which drugs in what quantities are good for my mental stability and which are not, and use them only at no net cost to my life's progression.

Point is, why should you care what anyone else is doing? Seems like most of the people in the anti-drug crusades are either a) overly paranoid soccer moms or b) people that always resented drug users because they felt outcast or weak for not doing them.

Do em or don't. In the end that's how it's going to go down anyways, you aren't going to make anyone's mind up for them, so why thrash uselessly against inevitability?

Somewhat of a tangent but that has always annoyed me.

 

[faulkton 5,000+ posts]

If you can't handle your drugs don't do them, why lash out at those of us who can? There is no point in turning on your fellow man because you feel inferior.
Some people just shouldn't do drugs, their mental climate is too high-strung. That's the way the cards are dealt sometimes. Hell, as a responsible drug user I know which drugs in what quantities are good for my mental stability and which are not, and use them only at no net cost to my life's progression.

Point is, why should you care what anyone else is doing? Seems like most of the people in the anti-drug crusades are either a) overly paranoid soccer moms or b) people that always resented drug users because they felt outcast or weak for not doing them.

Do em or don't. In the end that's how it's going to go down anyways, you aren't going to make anyone's mind up for them, so why thrash uselessly against inevitability?

Somewhat of a tangent but that has always annoyed me.

Hey bub, my main concern is with protecting people from man boobies. You might like looking at them, but i find them repulsive and am doing everything in my power to stop them in their tracks.

 

[DBfan187 5,000+ posts]

Ricky Williams.

 

[elementxero 10+ year member]

Man ***** are humorous, do you hate laughter too? //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/frown.gif.a3531fa0534503350665a1e957861287.gif

PS- I demand you requote with my ninja edits the first draft was subpar. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/pissed.gif.9f665f96bc89e98e708dabd4580bb591.gif

 

[faulkton 5,000+ posts]

PS- I demand you requote with my ninja edits the first draft was subpar. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/pissed.gif.9f665f96bc89e98e708dabd4580bb591.gif

done //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/wink.gif.608e3ea05f1a9f98611af0861652f8fb.gif

 

[azbass 5,000+ posts]

The misspelling was intentional. How often do I fail at grammar?

all lies

 

[faulkton 5,000+ posts]

Published: May 14, 2007 10:00 AM ET

WASHINGTON Soldiers serving overseas will lose some of their online links to friends and loved ones back home under a Department of Defense policy that a high-ranking Army official said would take effect Monday.

The Defense Department will begin blocking access "worldwide" to YouTube, MySpace and 11 other popular Web sites on its computers and networks, according to a memo sent Friday by Gen. B.B. Bell, the U.S. Forces Korea commander.

The policy is being implemented to protect information and reduce drag on the department's networks, according to Bell.

"This recreational traffic impacts our official DoD network and bandwidth ability, while posing a significant operational security challenge," the memo said.

The armed services have long barred members of the military from sharing information that could jeopardize their missions or safety, whether electronically or by other means.

The new policy is different because it creates a blanket ban on several sites used by military personnel to exchange messages, pictures, video and audio with family and friends.

Members of the military can still access the sites on their own computers and networks, but Defense Department computers and networks are the only ones available to many soldiers and sailors in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Iraqi insurgents or their supporters have been posting videos on YouTube at least since last fall, and the Army recently began posting videos on YouTube showing soldiers defeating insurgents and befriending Iraqis.

But the new rules mean many military personnel won't be able to watch those videos -- at least not on military computers.

If the restrictions are intended to prevent soldiers from giving or receiving bad news, they could also prevent them from providing positive reports from the field, said Noah Shachtman, who runs a national security blog for Wired Magazine.

"This is as much an information war as it is bombs and bullets," he said. "And they are muzzling their best voices."

The sites covered by the ban are the video-sharing sites YouTube, Metacafe, IFilm, StupidVideos and FileCabi; social networking sites MySpace, BlackPlanet and Hi5; music sites Pandora, MTV, 1.fm and live365; and the photo-sharing site Photobucket.

Several companies have instituted similar bans, saying recreational sites drain productivity.

Its not like keeping in contact with their families is important or anything. Certainly not as important as controlling the flow of media which might make the US look bad.

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003584737

 

[azbass 5,000+ posts]

cool

 

[BassAce 10+ year member]

interesting

 

[neonrt 10+ year member]

facebook is banned up here in canada in numerous workplaces.

 

[ace_800 5,000+ posts]

Its been banned everywhere I've been. Only contact was phone calls, if we got them, or if you had a yahoo account or some other basic email service.

 

[cpierce 5,000+ posts]

Have you been hanging out in FFA