#Statistical sampling

[marketxcel]

5 Methods of Data Collection for Quantitative Research

Discover five powerful techniques for gathering quantitative data in research, essential for uncovering trends, patterns, and correlations. Explore proven methodologies that empower researchers to collect and analyze data effectively.

[guiltyidealist]

On your MOST FOLLOWED blog on Tumblr,

[animentality]

[someaxelotl]

dumb stem classes affecting how I draw shit.

The physics trauma. It’s everywhere.

[alexaloraetheris]

My recent blunder has made me wonder (heh),

If it's nuance, click the closest match and elaborate in the tags.

[noivern]

decided to be insane today and make my d20s fight

[anistarrose]

there's a type of tumblr funnyperson who's never posted explicit hate/exclusionism towards asexuals and other a-specs... and yet, they like to make up a guy. where the type of guy they always make up undermines any trust a-specs might've otherwise had for them. for example, a common post format is making up a hypothetical tumblr user's bio that's obviously just so cringe, according to the sensibilities of everyone reading — wherein the implied joke is how we've all seen someone in the wild who's cringe like this, right?

these posts always feel the need to slide some a-spec microlabel in there. a lot of the time, it's specifically an ace-spec microlabel plus "heteroromantic," especially if they think that the guy they're making up is trying to be a real special snowflake. to round out the "cringe," they usually pepper in at least one element from the set of: neopronouns, a namedropped mental illness, and a piece of media that's targeted at children/popular for tumblr to hate at the time.

then a zillion people reblog that post, all agreeing haha that's so cringe, and a million a-spec people (and nonbinary and autistic people) shudder — because are they the butt of the joke, to the people reblogging it? or are the people reblogging just laughing about a different element, like a comically long DNI or something, which has distracted them from noticing the fact that OP clearly associates a-spec identities with "cringe"?

if any a-spec people point this out about OP, or ask a reblogger if they support ace people, they are inevitably accused of overreacting — which is great for the aphobes, because they get a new "cringe" a-spec person to point and laugh at. it's just such a nasty cycle, and even people who wouldn't consider themselves aphobes aren't great at noticing and interrogating it.

[scp-1296]

Okie dokie! New job, new horror podcast to lose my mind over. I did The Silt Verses last summer and it consumed my brain. I've narrowed it down to three:

[delicatebeauties]

Fav THK character & sexuality

[thesoupisburning]

menus

assuming 8.5x11 of course. and disregarding cover pages for the later answers

[theroundbartable]

Reblog for a bigger Sample size :)))

[theofficialpresidentofmars]

okay serious hypothetical time. I know we’ve all heard of the thought experiment ‘given infinite monkeys on typewriters and infinite time, eventually one of them would bang out the entirety of Hamlet by Shakespeare’ but I raise you one better:

If we were to take all the (finite) monkeys on Earth right now, stick them in a room with a typewriter and unlimited paper etc each, and take them back to the most recent common ancestor of humans and monkeys (friend taking biology gave me the estimate 5 million years ago, have not verified if this is true) and give them that much of a headstart, which would happen first?

Would the monkeys manage to produce a flawless transcription of Shakespeare’s Hamlet in the roughly 5 million years it takes to catch up, or would humanity manage to evolve, establish society, produce William Shakespeare and have him write Hamlet before the monkeys do?

For the sake of the argument, let’s say the monkeys are typing one letter a second and don’t need to eat, sleep, pee, whatever. They’re locked in to their key bashing. They also don’t grow or evolve at all, they’re sort of just stuck in eternal stasis as beings with their sole purpose being typing.

Human evolution happens exactly the same way it did in the past, we don’t risk changing anything or Shakespeare not being born or whatever.

There might be a clear answer here, but I don’t know enough about probability to know for sure.

If there is, what can we do to this question to make it a closer match? All the monkeys that have ever lived? They do have to account for eating and sleeping? Is the 5 million year estimate accurate, or am I way off?

Reblogging for a larger sample size would be appreciated :]

[withywindle-valley]

I think y'all wildly overestimating where your target market is hanging out

Reblog for sample size yadda yadda