I heard "carved my name into his legacy" instead of "leather seats" in Before He Cheats.

Liked the idea that the truck was this bozos legacy. Considering the line prior is "I dug my key into the side of his pretty little souped up four wheel drive" - I thought she keyed her name into the side and that sounded awesome.

I would add potato to that list. People fucking love potatoes on lots of forms.

This isn't really true in this election. Usual caveats, I'm voting blue and all that.

But likely voter polls favor Biden more than registered voters. There's straight up not a linear regression of people voting to democratic winners like this presents. It's bad statistics.

People who don't pay attention to politics at all are more likely to vote for Trump. I think that makes a lot of sense. People who pay attention aren't as likely to vote for him as people who don't really follow.

I do something similar. I use RAISE, COUNT, and then GLYPH. It knocks out so many combinations of letters that even when I get very few hits it usually becomes obvious. Similar to the above, but I like getting all the vowels in the first two words.

This comment says it better than I could. The debate was a disaster for Biden. Which sucks.

ITT: People not understanding probabilistic forecasts.

Nate Silvers models are not perfect, but pretty close. You can do retro analysis on them to see. If someone with a 5% chance to win actually does win, that doesn't mean the model was wrong... That just needs to actually happen only 5% of the time.

Getting elections"wrong" as people are talking about here shows they don't really know how these models work. If you haven't looked at the retrospective analysis on these results, then you are likely unqualified to declare that they are useless or wrong.

Saying polls are garbage is a straight bad take. The differentiation between polls is immense, and people treat them like they are just one thing.

They do adjust, and if you don't know that I'm not likely to believe you have the knowledge to say they are bad.

Polls are still very indicative. Democrats are not magically beating them by 9 points. That's just flatly untrue, unless you are just rolling every poll together with no regard for methodology, funding source, sample size, or track record.

Starting with a declaimer of being fairly far left...

Biden is not looking like he has a winning chance. He's barely leading in national polls, but those polls are misleading, as, because of the senate, democrats typically need to win by 2.5-3 points in order to have a shot at the electoral college. So he's behind there.

He's behind in several key states where he needs to win. If you count states where he's down 2 points or less, he BARELY has enough to win. Can't miss a single state.

The debate hurt Biden. This is not a logical contest, it's a popularity one, and Biden is not doing well. I think he's done some great policy things, but that's not how people vote. Democrats have to learn that it's not enough to be "right" if you're going to lose elections.

There is a sizeable gap between "beyond a reasonable doubt" in terms of a very specific law, and things that are gross/immoral.

People keep questioning the timeline as a defense... They might not have known until 2020. It's normally against internal company policies to just look through people's DMs. It's not like someone's job is to rifle through them. They probably were made aware of it, and then took action.

That's speculation on my part, but if Twitch sat on it for 3 years, shame on them too, but that doesn't so shit for this guy. It was still not ok.

The monetary incentive was to pay out his contract so they didn't have a VERY public story about a VERY high profile streamer inappropriately messaging a minor with their service. That could be super damaging for Twitch. So they likely paid it out to try and bury the story.

Mountain Goats right?

I mean you're not entirely wrong, but you're a little wrong. Just because they added levels later doesn't mean you were correct... These games have road maps, and they don't quickly change gears. There's math and analytics that go into all of it.

I think you're stretching when you say "around a few people". There's more money in 10,000 people spending a bit than 10 spending a ton. It's a gradient. The top 10 spend a lot, but not enough to morph your road map for. Especially when the companies own multiple properties. Better to get them transitioned to a new game within your umbrella than disrupt the entire content road map.

There's also far worse stuff than that and way harsher criticisms. You're getting closer with the "changing the prices" bit, but it's even worse than that, imo.

It's the reason I left working at one of them as a data analyst. I'm not speaking in generalities or that interested in debating here... I know precisely how the calculations for these types of things are done because I used to be on the team that did them.

Not this game, but a different one. The whole industry operates very similarly.

Adding thousands of levels for 1 whale is unlikely to be profitable. That's a lot of development cost for content that likely won't be seen. Pointing to other games by the same studio is a much better idea if you can get them to make the transition.