[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Bad keyword with email in answer (85): Using 'lifted index finger', as an expression for 'being lectured' by user390891 on english.SE

What a fat ignorant wanker.

@Robusto Träumerei

RIP Ennio Morricone.

@RegDwigнt Truly in a class by himself.

Compare Morricone's themes with someone of the same era: Elmer Bernstein.

Hear how rambunctiously overblown EB is here?

Morricone builds to his climaxes—inexorably, patiently, never getting faster than our response time.

As good as it is, even the theme for The Magnificent Seven is overblown and out of context with the film:

Big, bold, bravura—sorry, Elmer, but there are more emotions than that. Morricone knew how to hit them all.

Cf. Terence Malick's "Days of Heaven":

And Morricone was composing virtually right up until he died. Listen to this:

Hear how it builds, coming from a quiet disturbance to an emotionally laden climax?

And thanks to audio production techniques he has the flute—yes!—bursting forth with that climax. The unease is somehow never released, however. He leads you right into the film (which is rubbish, btw, in my view) expecting disquieting drama to follow. Not his fault that Tarantino didn't pay it off.

And, of course, there's the iconic theme he'll always be remembered for:

So long, Ennio. You will be missed.

@RegDwigнt: So ... Punch Drunk Love was an adequate film, I suppose. Anderson seems to be channeling a bit (only a bit) of Terry Gilliam, in parts dystopian, in parts magical realism. The "piano" symbolism didn't feel entirely worked out. An emblem of love? It, like the love, felt unmotivated to me, very ad hoc.

And Adam Sandler was ... Adam Sandler. Still. Not as cloying as usual, but cloying nevertheless. Still, it was the best performance I've seen him turn in. Such as it is.

It was a watchable film. I'll give it that.

One more from Ennio:

Aww, hell. Why not one more?

@Færd No studies would make such an egregious error, I think. I think it's just normal social media crap propagating

@Færd I think you're misunderstanding survivorship bias.

> Survivorship bias or survival bias is the logical error of concentrating on the people or things that made it past some selection process and overlooking those that did not, typically because of their lack of visibility.

People that visit the hospitals and take the COVID test aren't a random sample of the population. They're more or less folks that showed mild or severe symptoms

That's your filter. Less paranoid and/or more reckless people don't show up. The majority of the population that does not show the symptoms does not show up.

*do not show up

Hey guys. I have a question and I didn't know how to contact moderators (not sure if that's even possible). Anyway, how can I have one of my questions removed? It was unrelated and therefore downvoted. It's really uglifying (probably not the best time to use that word for the first time) my list of questions.

@Askeladd If you flag your post for moderator attention and ask for your account to be dissociated from the question, I think they would approve it

@M.A.R.Oh okay, thanks. Man this is such a cool place xD

@Robusto Have you seen Uncut Gems? I was rather skeptical but I realized I like his monotone in the end

Warning: It's loud. The music is weird.

Although I'm of course no judge of that.

But the Safdies sound like a milder version of Coens.

@Askeladd Beauty in the eye of beholder. If you wanna ensure I get the ping, make sure to add a space after my username

@Robusto Oh my God :'( RIP

I can't believe this! q_q

@M.A.R. Understood. Thanks

Umm, by the way, how many questions am I allowed to ask on this website? What if I only ask questions and never (am able to) answer any? Will I be restricted after a certain number of questions even though my questions are not downvoted?

@Askeladd 1) I don't think your reputation level has any special restrictions on asking, except the rate limit on asking questions too fast. 2) It's pretty OK. 3) No, definitely not.

You have people with thousands of questions and good standing, and you have folks that get themselves Q-banned with 4 questions.

The limits on asking questions are much more strict for 10> rep

@M.A.R. I see. Much appreciated

Don't mention it

@M.A.R. I've not seen it. I see it has a favorable score on IMDB, so perhaps I'll check it out. Has Sandler mellowed after all this time? The thing I never liked about him was the man-boy cutesyness he always seemed to go after.

@Robusto Well, his every second word in the movie is "fuck", and he's an almost ruined businessman/gambler, and he ends up pissing off the wrong people. He didn't sound all that differently for me, the way he often sounds like, but he puts in some real work otherwise and the whole cutesyness blends with and shapes the role

OK. If I get a chance I'll give it a try.

Of course, he subsequently immediately starred in another Happy Madison production with the familiar idiots, so I dunno if he was trying to prove something to himself or what was it all about. He's definitely not sober yet.

@M.A.R. That's a run-of-the-mill sampling bias. Not every sampling bias should be called a survivorship bias.

And I'm not aware that this assertion (about the 20%) is based on a biased sample. I haven't looked at the study, if any. I thought it possible that they'd conducted some random tests around the country.

.

@Færd survivorship bias is a subset of selection bias. shrug Not the hill I'm dying on, the sentiment is obviously more important.

I found out there's in fact a phrase specifically for this situation: Berkson's fallacy.

Well, a variation of it. Bloody statistics. Who cares what you call it. A hospital is definitely not a random gathering of people.

Scratch that, it's not Berkson's paradox

@M.A.R. Yes.

If that's the basis of the 20% figure.

@Færd I think the claim is that 18 (?) out of every 100 covid testers in the hospitals turn out to be positive, which is what the health officials reported AFAIK. (Whether there's manipulation of data or not, I dunno) and people do the math and say 18 out of 100 is how many out of 84 million? And this extra bit of deduction is incorrect reasoning

goodreads.com/topic/show/…

How can people read so much and still not capitalize an "I"? Few type coherently there, but the rest are indistinguishable from a goblin horde.

I was actually looking around to see whether Rothfuss is worth reading and I stumbled upon that.

Has anyone here read Rothfuss to advise me?