Thom Volker

Of all victims caught in the crossfire in Iran and neighboring countries, shall we not interview all rich people who moved there to dodge taxes?

- real sus that you want to require specific ID to vote and then immediately set precedent to instantaneously invalidate people’s ids

- this also includes a “bounty” on trans people using the bathroom. Which is so disgusting I cannot even express how bad of an idea this is

This is deeply alarming.

Kansas revokes driver's licenses of hundreds of trans people, prompted by new law Prompted by a new law, Kansas began sending letters to some trans people saying their drivers licenses were being invalidated until they change their gender information.

🚨hey so this is absolutely HORRIBLE for so many reasons I can’t even fully list out. But a few:

- licenses are immediately invalid, making it difficult to even get around to change license or god forbid APPEAL THIS DECISION

Do you really know what a power analysis is, then? Like, if you understand the definition, you essentially have your pseudo-code.

".. but Claude sa- "

Tbf said person probably doesn't know what a power analysis is, or a parameter

But it also harms the (long-term) doing!1!!!!11!

Well, apparently there are also people who know that no one checks the author lists of those papers, and add said paper to their profile illegitimately.

Thanks Nick!

It was a perfect assist

Then you’re clearly not a tsar.

It is actually a legit term? I only heard border tsar before, and assumed this was some stupid invention of the current US gov.

It is so clear that their words don’t bear any meaning. If you truly believe “radical left” is a security risk, and that a company is “radically leftist”, then would you really want your government to do business with this company?

True! As a non-native speaker I’m always genuinely delighted when a reviewer remarks that a paper is well written (even when the paper is trashed afterwards)

Coincidentally this gif is also an exact depiction of code in base R
<ducks again>

It's so ironic how often bigots talked about being "unpersoned" because people did not want to socialize with them. You know what's really an "unpersoning"? Having no driver's license in a rural area. Losing the one ID you need to vote or pay taxes or open a bank account.

Too bad you didn’t develop pydyverse

Okay the headline is nuts but wtf is a jobs tsar?

Post a pic you took, no context, to bring some zen to the feed.

Hahah I cannot even remember the last time I opened python

🥲

python is better than R

<ducks>

Alongside something on tidyverse-dogma, indeed.

In any case, I see clear advantages on learning tidyverse in an introductory course; but please alongside other essentials from base R.

This resource nowhere states that loops are bad, and as I read it, it merely states that "not everything needs to be a loop", which is hardly controversial. I don't agree with the statement that the tidyverse should be the first thing students learn when being introduced to R.

I didn't have that impression at all, but thank you for clarifying. My main point, which I perhaps did not articulate very clearly, was that both approaches have clear benefits, depending on the use case.

that students will miss out if they don't learn it. Especially for applied data analysis, these tools simplify many operations, and can help to keep code cleaner and more readable. From that perspective, I can see why the focus is on sth like "often, you don't need loops; if you do, you can".

Personally, I don't see R4DS as a first course in R. I'd like my students to learn base R first, because it allows them to understand the actual mechanics of R, and provides much more flexibility later on. That said, I also believe the tidyverse contains so many helpful tools for data analysis,

Thanks for the context, genuinely interesting! In any case, in these resources, I don't think there is any statement like "for-loops are bad". Quite the contrary, it is discussed in the book, indicating that there is time and place for loops, but perhaps not with the detail you think it deserves.