Seemingly trivial things that intrigue you

rjsterry

First.Aspect said:

.

briantrumpet said:

rick_chasey said:

I am genuinely surprised suicides *went down* in lockdown.

Obvious when you see the stats as to why but I would have said the absolute opposite if I was guessing.

I think that the predictions were that they'd go up, particularly from those who wanted to tell us that lockdowns were evil, though I didn't see anyone arguing they'd go down.

You only posted an article about teenagers in the US though.

Why do you think US teenagers are any different from UK teenagers when it comes to their mental health?

rjsterry

First.Aspect said:

rick_chasey said:

First.Aspect said:

.

briantrumpet said:

rick_chasey said:

I am genuinely surprised suicides *went down* in lockdown.

Obvious when you see the stats as to why but I would have said the absolute opposite if I was guessing.

I think that the predictions were that they'd go up, particularly from those who wanted to tell us that lockdowns were evil, though I didn't see anyone arguing they'd go down.

You only posted an article about teenagers in the US though.

Ah sorry. I forgot you need to debate the data and not the argument again.

As you were.

I find it helps to have some semblance of informed argument, I'm afraid.

Indeed. 🤨

First.Aspect

rjsterry said:

First.Aspect said:

.

briantrumpet said:

rick_chasey said:

I am genuinely surprised suicides *went down* in lockdown.

Obvious when you see the stats as to why but I would have said the absolute opposite if I was guessing.

I think that the predictions were that they'd go up, particularly from those who wanted to tell us that lockdowns were evil, though I didn't see anyone arguing they'd go down.

You only posted an article about teenagers in the US though.

Why do you think US teenagers are any different from UK teenagers when it comes to their mental health?

No, but I would guess that they are different from adults.

rick_chasey

Eh? What are you on about?

briantrumpet

First.Aspect said:

rjsterry said:

First.Aspect said:

.

briantrumpet said:

rick_chasey said:

I am genuinely surprised suicides *went down* in lockdown.

Obvious when you see the stats as to why but I would have said the absolute opposite if I was guessing.

I think that the predictions were that they'd go up, particularly from those who wanted to tell us that lockdowns were evil, though I didn't see anyone arguing they'd go down.

You only posted an article about teenagers in the US though.

Why do you think US teenagers are any different from UK teenagers when it comes to their mental health?

No, but I would guess that they are different from adults.

Do you not think it's valid/useful to look at the figures for children as a group?

First.Aspect

briantrumpet said:

First.Aspect said:

rjsterry said:

First.Aspect said:

.

briantrumpet said:

rick_chasey said:

I am genuinely surprised suicides *went down* in lockdown.

Obvious when you see the stats as to why but I would have said the absolute opposite if I was guessing.

I think that the predictions were that they'd go up, particularly from those who wanted to tell us that lockdowns were evil, though I didn't see anyone arguing they'd go down.

You only posted an article about teenagers in the US though.

Why do you think US teenagers are any different from UK teenagers when it comes to their mental health?

No, but I would guess that they are different from adults.

Do you not think it's valid/useful to look at the figures for children as a group?

Yes, but RC used these data to make a more general comment about expected suicide rates from lockdown, and inferred that the data show the opposite. They don't, because they related to a very narrow group of people.

rick_chasey

First.Aspect said:

briantrumpet said:

First.Aspect said:

rjsterry said:

First.Aspect said:

.

briantrumpet said:

rick_chasey said:

I am genuinely surprised suicides *went down* in lockdown.

Obvious when you see the stats as to why but I would have said the absolute opposite if I was guessing.

I think that the predictions were that they'd go up, particularly from those who wanted to tell us that lockdowns were evil, though I didn't see anyone arguing they'd go down.

You only posted an article about teenagers in the US though.

Why do you think US teenagers are any different from UK teenagers when it comes to their mental health?

No, but I would guess that they are different from adults.

Do you not think it's valid/useful to look at the figures for children as a group?

Yes, but RC used these data to make a more general comment about expected suicide rates from lockdown, and inferred that the data show the opposite. They don't, because they related to a very narrow group of people.

Did I? Or are you just taking what I said out of context?

First.Aspect

rick_chasey said:

First.Aspect said:

briantrumpet said:

First.Aspect said:

rjsterry said:

First.Aspect said:

.

briantrumpet said:

rick_chasey said:

I am genuinely surprised suicides *went down* in lockdown.

Obvious when you see the stats as to why but I would have said the absolute opposite if I was guessing.

I think that the predictions were that they'd go up, particularly from those who wanted to tell us that lockdowns were evil, though I didn't see anyone arguing they'd go down.

You only posted an article about teenagers in the US though.

Why do you think US teenagers are any different from UK teenagers when it comes to their mental health?

No, but I would guess that they are different from adults.

Do you not think it's valid/useful to look at the figures for children as a group?

Yes, but RC used these data to make a more general comment about expected suicide rates from lockdown, and inferred that the data show the opposite. They don't, because they related to a very narrow group of people.

Did I? Or are you just taking what I said out of context?

I don't know, did you? You said "they told us lockdown would cause suicides to rise". How might one interpret that, not with the benefit of hindsight?

You did, let's face it, what you normally do with data.

rick_chasey

First.Aspect said:

rick_chasey said:

First.Aspect said:

briantrumpet said:

First.Aspect said:

rjsterry said:

First.Aspect said:

.

briantrumpet said:

rick_chasey said:

I am genuinely surprised suicides *went down* in lockdown.

Obvious when you see the stats as to why but I would have said the absolute opposite if I was guessing.

I think that the predictions were that they'd go up, particularly from those who wanted to tell us that lockdowns were evil, though I didn't see anyone arguing they'd go down.

You only posted an article about teenagers in the US though.

Why do you think US teenagers are any different from UK teenagers when it comes to their mental health?

No, but I would guess that they are different from adults.

Do you not think it's valid/useful to look at the figures for children as a group?

Yes, but RC used these data to make a more general comment about expected suicide rates from lockdown, and inferred that the data show the opposite. They don't, because they related to a very narrow group of people.

Did I? Or are you just taking what I said out of context?

I don't know, did you? You said "they told us lockdown would cause suicides to rise". How might one interpret that, not with the benefit of hindsight?

You did, let's face it, what you normally do with data.

Stop digging. I posted an article about some data I thought was interesting, and then discussed it.

If you want to extrapolate, that's your business.

First.Aspect

rick_chasey said:

First.Aspect said:

rick_chasey said:

First.Aspect said:

briantrumpet said:

First.Aspect said:

rjsterry said:

First.Aspect said:

.

briantrumpet said:

rick_chasey said:

I am genuinely surprised suicides *went down* in lockdown.

Obvious when you see the stats as to why but I would have said the absolute opposite if I was guessing.

I think that the predictions were that they'd go up, particularly from those who wanted to tell us that lockdowns were evil, though I didn't see anyone arguing they'd go down.

You only posted an article about teenagers in the US though.

Why do you think US teenagers are any different from UK teenagers when it comes to their mental health?

No, but I would guess that they are different from adults.

Do you not think it's valid/useful to look at the figures for children as a group?

Yes, but RC used these data to make a more general comment about expected suicide rates from lockdown, and inferred that the data show the opposite. They don't, because they related to a very narrow group of people.

Did I? Or are you just taking what I said out of context?

I don't know, did you? You said "they told us lockdown would cause suicides to rise". How might one interpret that, not with the benefit of hindsight?

You did, let's face it, what you normally do with data.

Stop digging. I posted an article about some data I thought was interesting, and then discussed it.

If you want to extrapolate, that's your business.

If you want to discuss things, this may involve occasionally getting things wrong and having this pointed out to you. If you don't like it just start a blog.

pinno

Back OT:

How come Rick can run a successful business and post endlessly on here all day and read lots of articles?

rick_chasey

pinno said:

Back OT:

How come Rick can run a successful business and post endlessly on here all day and read lots of articles?

My job is quite on and off. When you're on you're *on* but there's a lot of milling about waiting for people to meet or take you up to their meeting rooms etc.

orraloon

Ah c'mon, the RC and the FA are both autobots. Innit.

kingstongraham

First.Aspect said:

rick_chasey said:

First.Aspect said:

rick_chasey said:

First.Aspect said:

briantrumpet said:

First.Aspect said:

rjsterry said:

First.Aspect said:

.

briantrumpet said:

rick_chasey said:

I am genuinely surprised suicides *went down* in lockdown.

Obvious when you see the stats as to why but I would have said the absolute opposite if I was guessing.

I think that the predictions were that they'd go up, particularly from those who wanted to tell us that lockdowns were evil, though I didn't see anyone arguing they'd go down.

You only posted an article about teenagers in the US though.

Why do you think US teenagers are any different from UK teenagers when it comes to their mental health?

No, but I would guess that they are different from adults.

Do you not think it's valid/useful to look at the figures for children as a group?

Yes, but RC used these data to make a more general comment about expected suicide rates from lockdown, and inferred that the data show the opposite. They don't, because they related to a very narrow group of people.

Did I? Or are you just taking what I said out of context?

I don't know, did you? You said "they told us lockdown would cause suicides to rise". How might one interpret that, not with the benefit of hindsight?

You did, let's face it, what you normally do with data.

Stop digging. I posted an article about some data I thought was interesting, and then discussed it.

If you want to extrapolate, that's your business.

If you want to discuss things, this may involve occasionally getting things wrong and having this pointed out to you. If you don't like it just start a blog.

In that spirit, I think you're wrong here.

In a discussion *only* about teen suicides and schools, saying "I am genuinely surprised suicides *went down* in lockdown." would logically also be about teen suicides.

Imagine he'd said "I am genuinely surprised the numbers went down", would you argue that it was trying to extrapolate to all numbers?

First.Aspect

kingstongraham said:

First.Aspect said:

rick_chasey said:

First.Aspect said:

rick_chasey said:

First.Aspect said:

briantrumpet said:

First.Aspect said:

rjsterry said:

First.Aspect said:

.

briantrumpet said:

rick_chasey said:

I am genuinely surprised suicides *went down* in lockdown.

Obvious when you see the stats as to why but I would have said the absolute opposite if I was guessing.

I think that the predictions were that they'd go up, particularly from those who wanted to tell us that lockdowns were evil, though I didn't see anyone arguing they'd go down.

You only posted an article about teenagers in the US though.

Why do you think US teenagers are any different from UK teenagers when it comes to their mental health?

No, but I would guess that they are different from adults.

Do you not think it's valid/useful to look at the figures for children as a group?

Yes, but RC used these data to make a more general comment about expected suicide rates from lockdown, and inferred that the data show the opposite. They don't, because they related to a very narrow group of people.

Did I? Or are you just taking what I said out of context?

I don't know, did you? You said "they told us lockdown would cause suicides to rise". How might one interpret that, not with the benefit of hindsight?

You did, let's face it, what you normally do with data.

Stop digging. I posted an article about some data I thought was interesting, and then discussed it.

If you want to extrapolate, that's your business.

If you want to discuss things, this may involve occasionally getting things wrong and having this pointed out to you. If you don't like it just start a blog.

In that spirit, I think you're wrong here.

In a discussion *only* about teen suicides and schools, saying "I am genuinely surprised suicides *went down* in lockdown." would logically also be about teen suicides.

Imagine he'd said "I am genuinely surprised the numbers went down", would you argue that it was trying to extrapolate to all numbers?

Because he was? That's why he's huffy.

First.Aspect

orraloon said:

Ah c'mon, the RC and the FA are both autobots. Innit.

I know I am.

kingstongraham

First.Aspect said:

kingstongraham said:

First.Aspect said:

rick_chasey said:

First.Aspect said:

rick_chasey said:

First.Aspect said:

briantrumpet said:

First.Aspect said:

rjsterry said:

First.Aspect said:

.

briantrumpet said:

rick_chasey said:

I am genuinely surprised suicides *went down* in lockdown.

Obvious when you see the stats as to why but I would have said the absolute opposite if I was guessing.

I think that the predictions were that they'd go up, particularly from those who wanted to tell us that lockdowns were evil, though I didn't see anyone arguing they'd go down.

You only posted an article about teenagers in the US though.

Why do you think US teenagers are any different from UK teenagers when it comes to their mental health?

No, but I would guess that they are different from adults.

Do you not think it's valid/useful to look at the figures for children as a group?

Yes, but RC used these data to make a more general comment about expected suicide rates from lockdown, and inferred that the data show the opposite. They don't, because they related to a very narrow group of people.

Did I? Or are you just taking what I said out of context?

I don't know, did you? You said "they told us lockdown would cause suicides to rise". How might one interpret that, not with the benefit of hindsight?

You did, let's face it, what you normally do with data.

Stop digging. I posted an article about some data I thought was interesting, and then discussed it.

If you want to extrapolate, that's your business.

If you want to discuss things, this may involve occasionally getting things wrong and having this pointed out to you. If you don't like it just start a blog.

In that spirit, I think you're wrong here.

In a discussion *only* about teen suicides and schools, saying "I am genuinely surprised suicides *went down* in lockdown." would logically also be about teen suicides.

Imagine he'd said "I am genuinely surprised the numbers went down", would you argue that it was trying to extrapolate to all numbers?

Because he was? That's why he's huffy.

It could be that, or it could be because he wasn't.

First.Aspect

kingstongraham said:

First.Aspect said:

kingstongraham said:

First.Aspect said:

rick_chasey said:

First.Aspect said:

rick_chasey said:

First.Aspect said:

briantrumpet said:

First.Aspect said:

rjsterry said:

First.Aspect said:

.

briantrumpet said:

rick_chasey said:

I am genuinely surprised suicides *went down* in lockdown.

Obvious when you see the stats as to why but I would have said the absolute opposite if I was guessing.

I think that the predictions were that they'd go up, particularly from those who wanted to tell us that lockdowns were evil, though I didn't see anyone arguing they'd go down.

You only posted an article about teenagers in the US though.

Why do you think US teenagers are any different from UK teenagers when it comes to their mental health?

No, but I would guess that they are different from adults.

Do you not think it's valid/useful to look at the figures for children as a group?

Yes, but RC used these data to make a more general comment about expected suicide rates from lockdown, and inferred that the data show the opposite. They don't, because they related to a very narrow group of people.

Did I? Or are you just taking what I said out of context?

I don't know, did you? You said "they told us lockdown would cause suicides to rise". How might one interpret that, not with the benefit of hindsight?

You did, let's face it, what you normally do with data.

Stop digging. I posted an article about some data I thought was interesting, and then discussed it.

If you want to extrapolate, that's your business.

If you want to discuss things, this may involve occasionally getting things wrong and having this pointed out to you. If you don't like it just start a blog.

In that spirit, I think you're wrong here.

In a discussion *only* about teen suicides and schools, saying "I am genuinely surprised suicides *went down* in lockdown." would logically also be about teen suicides.

Imagine he'd said "I am genuinely surprised the numbers went down", would you argue that it was trying to extrapolate to all numbers?

Because he was? That's why he's huffy.

It could be that, or it could be because he wasn't.

Anything is possible.

N0bodyOfTheGoat

Strava users that join hundreds (or even thousands) of clubs.

I have no interest in what you are doing in Caracas, for example, when I'm looking at public local Hampshire club rides, to see where people are riding and hopefully staying upright in this nippy spell.

Another user joins my blocked list.

briantrumpet

I'm now intrigued by Instagram. I've not quite worked out why it should be much more popular with younger people... it's got to be more than just they like square photos...

kingstongraham

briantrumpet said:

I'm now intrigued by Instagram. I've not quite worked out why it should be much more popular with younger people... it's got to be more than just they like square photos...

I thought it was outdated, isn't it all tiktok now?

briantrumpet

kingstongraham said:

briantrumpet said:

I'm now intrigued by Instagram. I've not quite worked out why it should be much more popular with younger people... it's got to be more than just they like square photos...

I thought it was outdated, isn't it all tiktok now?

Yeah, think so... first impression is that it's starting to draw in the FB demographic, and it's turning into FB with square photos. That said, it seems to be working nicely for an ex-pupil https://www.instagram.com/willpearcemusic/ - 11k followers for his quirky beetle-&-music animations... not exactly mainstream stuff. They might intrigue you.

rick_chasey

kingstongraham said:

briantrumpet said:

I'm now intrigued by Instagram. I've not quite worked out why it should be much more popular with younger people... it's got to be more than just they like square photos...

I thought it was outdated, isn't it all tiktok now?

young millennials and old Gen Z are the biggest users of IG.

I think it's just what was used by young people 5 years ago is just used by the same people 5 years later.

briantrumpet

rick_chasey said:

kingstongraham said:

briantrumpet said:

I'm now intrigued by Instagram. I've not quite worked out why it should be much more popular with younger people... it's got to be more than just they like square photos...

I thought it was outdated, isn't it all tiktok now?

young millennials and old Gen Z are the biggest users of IG.

I think it's just what was used by young people 5 years ago is just used by the same people 5 years later.

Yes, that's what I'm seeing on my first interaction with IG, and why I guess Tiktok is overtaking IG. Thwn something will overtake TT...

rick_chasey

TikTok is much better than IG at sending you new content that you will enjoy.

Much much better.

Pross

I'd say for my younger daughter who likes her social media the order is something like Snapchat, Tiktok, Instagram (YouTube is in the somewhere too but mainly for viewing). She still uses Facebook but really just as stories rather than posts (and I think a lot of that is where it has linked from one of the other apps).

briantrumpet

I don't really get the reason for having IG and FB since they are both owned by Zuckerberg, and lots of people just seem to post the same stuff to both, and IG seems to be less adaptable, and for photos allows only one format. I suspect it's that its appeal is/was it's just 'not FB' and its association with the older generations.

Pross

I prefer IG when used properly, i.e. to just share pictures, as it seems to be a friendlier environment although it does seem to have gradually got more polluted by spam and tolls. I suspect that is more because of the awful recommended posts you now get and can't switch off. It was a far better place before they started that.

briantrumpet

Pross said:

I prefer IG when used properly, i.e. to just share pictures, as it seems to be a friendlier environment although it does seem to have gradually got more polluted by spam and tolls. I suspect that is more because of the awful recommended posts you now get and can't switch off. It was a far better place before they started that.

Yes, I can see that the simplicity of just sharing individual square photos would appeal and be its USP, and probably why I'll play around with it for while as a 'photo of the day' exercise.

pblakeney

IIRC IG was originally just to be for sharing photos.
Then Zuckerberg decided to monetise it, and ruined it.