People see your face every day and its no big deal but imagine if the same person was staring at you and recording you with a cell phone every day, and that this same person was showing up at more and more street corners. If this same person were staring at you and recording you everywhere you went, wouldn’t you find that disturbing? Now imagine that the person uploads all thier recordings to a computer for the police and government to access.

How do you know which one is illegal? It’s the one that’s going too fast.

Ebikes are an excellent, relatively inexpensive solution to several problems. They’re going to try to regulate them until they become impractical.

I agree with all of your points. However, in California, ebikes are already regulated:

https://riding5.com/blogs/news/california-ebike-laws-class-1-2-3

The only “wild west” thing happening is that some people are riding illegal, (they’re already illegal. We don’t need new laws) unregistered electric motorcycles. The 30+ mph “ebikes” you refer to: those are motorcycles.

And when will he face retribution?

Would a lion eat a housecat? Maybe cats just think a human in a cat costume is a giant fucking predator death machine.

A warrant is a start. Now let’s see some more warrants and some arrests and convictions.

When I used to have to go in with a checkbook, you had to pay extra for bitches to hold onto the hotdog until it heated up.

…something about a golf ball through a garden hose

You’re doing god’s work.

I’ve noticed that on the internet, many people can write but they can’t read. Its almost the opposite of slightly knowing a foreign language, where you can understand other people speaking it but aren’t able to speak it yourself.

It seems like your choices when confronted by ICE are:

1. Try to run away. You may get get murdered during your attempt.
2. Identify yourself, possibly be incorrectly identified as “not a citizen,” possibly die in a concentration camp.
3. Exercise the second amendment. Get shot and die.

Trump is already a floating turd. The shit he says should make you more angry, not more apathetic.

Take your weak-ass bullshit attitude somewhere else.

I think “murders” pretty much sums it up.

Would you mark this as nsfw, please? Her ports are all showing!

There’s certainly a lot to discuss, relative to experimental design and ethics. Peer review and good design hopefully minimize the clearly undesirable scenarios you describe as well as other subtle sources of error.

I was really just trying to explain what we’re looking at on op’s graph.

My limited knowledge on this subject: The z-score is how many standard deviations you are from the mean.

In statistical analysis, things are often evaluated against a p (probability) of 0.05 (or 5%), which also corresponds to a z-score of 1.96 (or roughly 2).

So, when you’re looking at your data, things with a z score >2 or <2 would correspond to findings that are “statistically significant,” in that you’re at least 95% sure that your findings aren’t due to random chance.

As others here have pointed out, z-scores closer to 0 would correspond to findings where they couldn’t be confident that whatever was being tested was any different than the control, akin to a boring paper which wouldn’t be published. “We tried some stuff but idk, didn’t seem to make a difference.” But it could also make for an interesting paper, “We tried putting healing crystals above cancer patients but it didn’t seem to make any difference.”