lame

wasn't online gambling supposed to be outlawed

recently?

the 2020 us election is free money

Besides Bernie is there anyone that the left has that could stand a chance against the god emperor?

I KNOW

gambling in america has always been a bit tough, vegas and such wanna keep their stranglehold lol

Geo-fenced for nations that outlawed it

1 - normcdf((100-105)/(sqrt(15^2+10^2)), 0, 1)

Ah, I got it

ans = 0.60924

it got to the point in the UK people were betting if a guy was gunna eat a pie during a football match, then there was some drama about bet fixing with the pie lol

let's see so far they have Wakanda Harris, Pocahontas, and Snory Booker

The chances that a randomly selected individual from a normal distributed population of 105 is smarter than someone from one with a 100 mean is 61%.

Pocahontas 😆 😆

I'm dead

Hay Timcast, I want my Pochantas playlist!

60% aint that high tbh

The chances that somebody has an IQ ≤ 120 is 91%, given a population of 100 IQ mean, and standard deviation of 15. Naturally, the chances that one is above 120 is then (100 - 91)% = 9%.

Therefor, the total number of individuals then depends on the size of the population, of course, so in a town with a random sampling that only has 100 inhabitants, we would expect only 9 such individuals, while a city of 100,000 would have 9,000 such individuals.

If we had a school that selects purely on IQ, then one would expect 59/41=1.44 as many Japanese as Europeans, but if there were 1.44 times as many Europeans in the population as Japanese, then one would expect the same number of Japanese as Europeans in the class. So, if one had 100 Japanese and 144 Europeans, and one sets a cutoff at a certain IQ, one would expect the same number of Japanese as Europeans in that school.

I had written a series of posts on Gab about this.

You forgot about creepy uncle Joe Biden

Hmm ... okay. No Math then.

Anyway. I don't get why people get upset about statistics.

because stats can be abused, and often are abused

Because they're not morally correct

Yes, but don't be upset about the data then.

If it's wrong, point out why it's wrong.

i'm with you 100% just trying to argue the side of the emotionally inclined lol

I think denying the truth is far more harmful.

Joe hasn't said for sure if he is running @ZerioctheTank

Too many people are focused on being factually correct, and not about being morally right.

im currently in the process of converting an old friend of mine, was quite a hardcore SJW, and i'm bringing her to the middle

Morally right? I don't like that this is put into two categories.

it's all about MY truth now, not the truth, stop being a bigot

THAT DOESN'T APPEAL TO MY WORLDVIEW

That's what AOC said

Look, if I told someone "You are fat" every day, even if I was right, and I would be speaking the truth, it would be mean.

There is no point in saying it all the time.

sure there is

But you're not being morally right

But if someone asked me "Am I fat" and my friend is really obese and it would harm him - should I lie?