Internet channels you hate, but not worth their own thread

Talk about the internet itself instead of people.
User avatar
rabidtictac
Posts: 9915
Joined: Sat Mar 25, 2017 9:25 pm

Re: Internet channels you hate, but not worth their own thread

Post by rabidtictac » Wed Jan 23, 2019 8:32 pm

What people don't realize about stats on gambling is the percentage chance is per attempt. It's calculated every single time, as if in a vacuum. The chance of the coin coming up heads is the same 50% no matter how many times you flip it. It's therefore easy as fuck to get a bunch of heads or a bunch of tails in a row. You could win 20 times in a row or you could lose 20 times in a row. A flat 50% is a flat 50%. "Oh but it's unlikely I'd lose 20 times in a row." It's 50% every time. Every result of 20 coin tosses is unlikely when viewed with hindsight.

I say, stick to games that have at least an element of skill and don't play for money if you don't want to lose money.

User avatar
Kugelfisch
Supreme Shitposter
Posts: 15212
Joined: Sat Mar 25, 2017 1:36 pm

Re: Internet channels you hate, but not worth their own thread

Post by Kugelfisch » Wed Jan 23, 2019 9:16 pm

rabidtictac wrote:
Wed Jan 23, 2019 8:32 pm
What people don't realize about stats on gambling is the percentage chance is per attempt. It's calculated every single time, as if in a vacuum. The chance of the coin coming up heads is the same 50% no matter how many times you flip it. It's therefore easy as fuck to get a bunch of heads or a bunch of tails in a row. You could win 20 times in a row or you could lose 20 times in a row. A flat 50% is a flat 50%. "Oh but it's unlikely I'd lose 20 times in a row." It's 50% every time. Every result of 20 coin tosses is unlikely when viewed with hindsight.
That is still not how chances work. No, no it's not easy to get 20 wins in a row with a 1 in 2 chance. Go ahead and try for yourself if you want to. That's a 1 in 1048576 chance of happening so on average you'll still take hundreds of thousands of tries to have that happen to you once.
Yes, a flat 50% is a flat 50% per attempt. No, that doesn't mean that you can just lose dozens of times in a row. What it means is that in all attempts you're just as likely to win as you're to lose within any amount of time frame, meaning that you'll likely win once or twice, lose once or twice and so on.

But take notice that no casino runs a game with a 50:50 chance at all. My whole point was that the best possible chance you're ever getting in any casino game is roulette, which has a lower than 50% chance even. That's honestly enough. They don't make big money by having people just straight up lose all the fucking time or often in a row. They make money by having people win all the time but on average just a tiny bit less than they lose.
House rules that give the players incentives to keep playing, like bonus money and shit, and plenty of constant wins make sure that people empty their pockets little by little.
The ball is wild!

User avatar
rabidtictac
Posts: 9915
Joined: Sat Mar 25, 2017 9:25 pm

Re: Internet channels you hate, but not worth their own thread

Post by rabidtictac » Thu Jan 24, 2019 4:46 pm

I'm sure some of you edgelords will agree with the argument he's trying to make, but Stef is a cult leader lolcow. He's being a sly cunt and trying to pretend he's not arguing against interracial couples when that's exactly what he's doing.

Arguing against other people having relationships across racial lines is some serious Jim Crow-tier actual racism btw. My aunt is black and my uncle white and they were together until she passed away recently. I assume the higher mutual assault figures and higher rates of divorce are HEAVILY dependent upon the particular ethnic mixing involved (aka gang-affiliated males with wives are probably more likely to involve their families in crimes), as well as other factors such as income, health and general life stress.

User avatar
Kugelfisch
Supreme Shitposter
Posts: 15212
Joined: Sat Mar 25, 2017 1:36 pm

Re: Internet channels you hate, but not worth their own thread

Post by Kugelfisch » Thu Jan 24, 2019 7:48 pm

Nah, that's just you having jungle fever and still not understanding how chances work.
Fact is that couples from different cultural backgrounds are even less likely to work than those from the same background. No need to pretend as if race isn't a massive part of one's cultural background either. That argument may work in the libshit city you live in with your libshit friends but not here since intellectual dishonesty only works if both parties are willing to play along with it.
Nice anecdotal evidence you've got, though. Worked for one couple so it must for all, huh? Hell, I knew a lesbian couple that never had domestic violence. I guess lesbos being more likely to beat each other up must be false as well then.

And nobody likes mixed race people. They don't even like themselves. Hardly any combination makes something worth looking at and for every lighting in a bottle you get dozens of supreme gentlemen.
The ball is wild!

User avatar
rabidtictac
Posts: 9915
Joined: Sat Mar 25, 2017 9:25 pm

Re: Internet channels you hate, but not worth their own thread

Post by rabidtictac » Thu Jan 24, 2019 7:59 pm

I see two arguments here. One being that people who are less alike are less likely to have a good working romantic relationship. Another argument about skin color. If skin color is just one piece of that then why focus on the skin color aspect so much? A black burger and a white burger from the same general income level are still just burgers at the end of the day. But a frenchman and a white woman from south africa or texas come from very different cultures despite sharing the same color of skin.

I don't see how the color of skin, or the racial component, is to blame. I see a lot of things that are related but no proof of a causal link beyond the standard movieblob-tier eugenics shit about how certain races are inferior.

I just gave an example from my own life. I could link to people rebutting Stephen's interpretation of those studies but don't pretend you'd be open to that either.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1448064/
GPA

In only 1 case (Black/American Indian) does the mixed-race group value fall beyond the values of its constituent races.
PVT

In no case is the mixed-race group value beyond the values of its constituent races. The Black/Asian group and the Asian/American Indian group are omitted because they have cell sizes too small.
Family Structure

In only 1 case (White/Asian) is the mixed-race group outside the range of its constituent races.
Family Education

In only 2 cases (Black/Asian and Black/American Indian) was the mixed-race group outside the range of its constituent rates.

The general pattern of these nonrisk attributes is that the mixed-race groups have values that are between the values of the 2 constituent races. This lends support to the hypothesis that the mixed-race adolescents have been influenced by both racial groups and, therefore, have an experience that is between those who report the single constituent races.
Adolescents who identify themselves as mixed race are at higher health and behavior risk than those of 1 race. Nevertheless, most mixed-race adolescents are at low risk. Most of the risk items we assessed may be interpreted as related to stress, so we may therefore choose to interpret mixed race as a source of stress. We cannot identify further the source of the stress. Subsequent research can start with the assumption of greater risk for the mixed-race-identified adolescent and try to identify the sources of stress. Only then can we recommend programmatic attention to mixed-race youths. Our comparison of mixed-race-identified adolescents on family structure, parent education, GPA, and PVT shows that on these culture-related nonrisk characteristics, mixed race youths have values in-between the constituent races, confirming a mixed-race cultural experience.
It sounds like the stress is generalized and may be a result of the conflict between two cultures they grow up in the middle of. Maybe mom wants one thing because of her culture and dad wants a different thing because of his and this causes stress. I think studies like this are hardly the sort of evidence against mixed-race relationships that people like Stefan want them to be. The teens are still considered low risk according to the study.

User avatar
Guest

Re: Internet channels you hate, but not worth their own thread

Post by Guest » Thu Jan 24, 2019 8:54 pm

tictac's desire to be BLACKED is getting out of hand. It's not even a meme. And even if he doesn't wanna take Tyrone's BBC pozload, fucking a female ape just means AIDS + living life as Bill Burr.
rabidtictac wrote:
Thu Jan 24, 2019 7:59 pm
A black burger and a white burger from the same general income level are still just burgers at the end of the day. But a frenchman and a white woman from south africa or texas come from very different cultures despite sharing the same color of skin.
Only the nigger at the same income level commits exponentially more crime than the poorest of whites. Also your supposed Frenchman and white South African or Texan white woman have a good chance of being from a wildly different genetic makeup. Not all whites are the same. Truthfully not at blacks are the same either but that dosen't mean dicking one is gonna get you anywhere.
Kugelfisch wrote:
Thu Jan 24, 2019 7:48 pm
And nobody likes mixed race people.
Sometimes I masturbate to them. I'd never fuck one though, and I'm not just saying that because I couldn't, which I can't.

User avatar
Kugelfisch
Supreme Shitposter
Posts: 15212
Joined: Sat Mar 25, 2017 1:36 pm

Re: Internet channels you hate, but not worth their own thread

Post by Kugelfisch » Thu Jan 24, 2019 8:57 pm

rabidtictac wrote:
Thu Jan 24, 2019 7:59 pm
I see two arguments here. One being that people who are less alike are less likely to have a good working romantic relationship.
Absolutely.
rabidtictac wrote:
Thu Jan 24, 2019 7:59 pm
Another argument about skin color.
Race, not skin colour. A poodle and a pitbull aren't the same even if their fur has the same colour.
rabidtictac wrote:
Thu Jan 24, 2019 7:59 pm
A black burger and a white burger from the same general income level are still just burgers at the end of the day.
There's the intellectual dishonesty I'm talking about. You know that's not correct.
rabidtictac wrote:
Thu Jan 24, 2019 7:59 pm
But a frenchman and a white woman from south africa or texas come from very different cultures despite sharing the same color of skin.
Assuming a white French, which are exceedingly rare, sure.

Weasel weasel. "Less alike" "Just skin colour" "Income".
We're talking about culture. Same income, same nation, same area, a nigger (or any other kind of "minority") will still likely vastly deviate in culture. 4th generation Turks here are still vastly different in culture than Germans, let alone their families and the values ingrained into them by them. You can pretend like it's not the case all you want, everyone knows from experience that it isn't that way.
Now maybe, just maybe, Portland is so heavily demoralised of a place where Marxism has managed to stamp out culture so well that it's not as much of a thing anymore. Maybe you really see mostly cultureless NPC drones spouting the CNN propaganda as gospel truth where all skin colour is grey. But for the vast majority of this planet's population, that isn't the case, nor is it worth to strive for.
The ball is wild!

User avatar
Le Redditeur
Posts: 2248
Joined: Mon Mar 27, 2017 5:58 pm

Re: Internet channels you hate, but not worth their own thread

Post by Le Redditeur » Fri Jan 25, 2019 4:12 am

Burn the Coal, Pay the Toll.

User avatar
mad bum
Supreme Shitposter
Posts: 7347
Joined: Sat Mar 25, 2017 11:15 pm
Location: In spoony's rape dungeon

Re: Internet channels you hate, but not worth their own thread

Post by mad bum » Fri Jan 25, 2019 5:33 am

Image
"Dude, 5 moves, I'm sitting on your arm until it's snapping. But to each their own."

Image

User avatar
Guest

Re: Internet channels you hate, but not worth their own thread

Post by Guest » Fri Jan 25, 2019 9:22 am

how genetically different even are honkies and niggos. science says not as much as many here may think.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests