That’s the strategy, yes

Why is “helicopter” commonly shortened to “helo” rather than “heli” ?

Yay!

This may be a nonsense suggestion but is the game trying to activate the headphone mic?

If so this could be switching it to a different mode and cutting your headset audio quality in half.

EDIT: two other people suggested the same thing at the same time, never mind :)

This is great, honestly.

If you go back to antiquity, education was about philosophy. It was about learning how to observe, and think critically, and see the world for what it is.

And then in modern times, education became about memorisation - learning facts and figures and how to do this and that. And that way of teaching and learning just doesn’t fit any longer with what our digital age has become.

In my opinion, we are heavily overdue for a revamp of what education should be, and what skills are most important to society in this post-truth world. Critical thinking is an important foundation to real knowledge that we don’t teach enough.

The number one thing I noticed after installing Linux on my old macbook was that the battery life was immediately halved.

I totally expected that to happen, though, because my previous experience had always been that power management on Linux was kinda terrible.

Time to try this out and see!

“I think the existing, altruistic, free version of Reddit will continue to exist and grow and thrive just the way it has,” Huffman said.

There’s nothing ‘altruistic’ about reddit

The findings here seem like a real stretch.

Saying that people can “Accurately” identify names for adults but not children feels tenuous when they only answered correctly less than 25% of the time for children and slightly more than 25% for adults, among four options. That’s barely better than random chance.

If there really even is any correlation between name and appearance, then as other people have said, this is likely due to factors of age, and popularity of different names at different times. The child group used children only from a narrow range of 9-12 whereas the adult group was broader, so it would be easier to see the influence of age in the adult group.

I assumed those conducting the study would be very familiar with that bias and try to eliminate it by only using names that were equally popular at the same time as the person’s actual age for each question, but I couldn’t find that information.

If we assume they DID try to eliminate generational popularity as a factor, there are still more plausible explanations IMO.

For example, different names are going to be popular among different socioeconomic backgrounds - wealth, education, political leaning, geographic location of the parents will all affect name choice!

So if there is any correlation at all, my personal conclusion would not be that the name determines who people grow up to be, but that someone’s physical appearance is influenced by their socioeconomic background, and that name also correlates with that background.

So name is simply a predictor for what background someone grew up with, nothing more!

Exactly.

In a horse race, punters tend to spread bets across horses with no bias or favouritism - they place the bet because they want to make money, not because they are invested in the outcome.

In a political race, people bet for one team because they are ideologically aligned and want to show support.

If Republicans are much more likely than Democrats to gamble and place bets on their candidate, this creates market pressure and the odds for a Republican win will increase (I.e. get more likely) as a result of that.

Betting odds are influenced by other factors beyond the underlying probability, including behaviour of betters and where bets are placed.

Take horse racing. If a horse was given a 40% chance to win but lots of people start piling money on that horse rather than any others, this creates unbalanced risk for the bookmaker as bets on one outcome need to be balanced by bets on another to ensure the bookmaker makes money.

The bookmaker will respond to this by adjusting the odds of the popular horse upward to a higher probability, e.g. 60% And that can happen purely through market behaviour, even though nothing about the horse or the track or the race itself has changed!

So it could be that Trump is the genuine statistical favourite. But it could also be that Republicans are just more likely to gamble and place bets on their candidate than Democrats are.