Comments on: Spain to Crackdown on Pirate Sites and Outlaw File-Sharing

By: Ardvaark

Ardvaark — Sun, 14 Apr 2013 23:19:00 +0000

Still using the tools backwards

As for any validity of my claims which by the way are in no way theory, you seem to be confusing facts with theories, go ahead and read by 3 paragraph long explanation on why you’re wrong.

If you have any doubts on my calculus, feel free to look up any book on statistics and point out where I’ve failed.

Until then shut up in your ignorance and stop shifting the blame to my side as if I’ve not explained myself enough.

By: Canadian

Canadian — Sun, 14 Apr 2013 20:35:00 +0000

Dont know why people have to link to the content. Just have a nice review site about movies and and such that are posted via P2P. Then post a youtube video on how to use bittorrent with a VPN if the users are so inclined.

By: DornerTheDarkKnight

DornerTheDarkKnight — Sun, 14 Apr 2013 19:13:00 +0000

Considering you left the comment “n*ggers” on boxhouston you got a lot of nerve complaining about “homophobia” of course considering how racist gays are I shouldn’t be surprised

Link to the racist and protector of gays Milkshake Man’s comment

http://theboxhouston.com/8423901/rihannas-california-king-bed-new-video/#comment-841413359

By: SoundnuoS

SoundnuoS — Sun, 14 Apr 2013 18:30:00 +0000

The tool outputs the sample size if you decide on a confidence level and desired margin of error.

You can also use it to check the margin of error of any sample size. In the case of 3705 it becomes 1.61.

If you’re using the tool the way you describe, it means you’ve decided that a confidence level of 95% and a margin of error of 1.61 is necessary in order for the sample size to be valid.

Still no link supporting that theory, and I suspect one won’t be seen very soon.

By: Ardvaark

Ardvaark — Sun, 14 Apr 2013 17:21:00 +0000

That would be true if you knew what the percentages would be.

Besides the tool clearly outputs the sample size and not the other way around. Why the hell do you keep playing the dumb card?

Oh wait… we’ve already found out why….

By: SoundnuoS

SoundnuoS — Sun, 14 Apr 2013 15:49:00 +0000

Nope, it says that a sample size of 3705 gives you a sample error of 1.61.

One single external link that would validate this pet theory of yours as to how statistical validity is determined in social research is too much to ask, I guess?

By: Lolatron

Lolatron — Sun, 14 Apr 2013 02:08:00 +0000

In Aus, wordmean (website news thingy) has a campaign going on billboards that protests it best with “Boycott the monopolists – spend your money on local amateur bands and movies”

By: Ardvaark

Ardvaark — Sat, 13 Apr 2013 21:03:00 +0000

Actually it says that the sample is too small because it’s not 3705.

You seem to be confused.

By: SoundnuoS

SoundnuoS — Sat, 13 Apr 2013 20:47:00 +0000

“You should be aware that those tools point out the population is too low.”
No, they don’t. They give us the margin of error. Based on that we can then see if the sample size is too small. In this case, it’s not.

By: Ardvaark

Ardvaark — Sat, 13 Apr 2013 20:11:00 +0000

The calculus and the tools both give us the same values.

Finally you accept the validity of the calculus? Good
that’s it.

You should be aware that those tools point out the population is too low. No need to bring the same copypasta you’ve said before I already told you what you’re missing.