DAST Chat

2011-10-03 09:50:05

#3651

Cybargs: Moderated; +2,285|6972

Jay I think you've been doing too much engineering as of late

Financial baseline is usually 0, when they say a 31% increase it means 131 and when they mean a 131% increase usually means 231

https://cache.www.gametracker.com/server_info/203.46.105.23:21300/b_350_20_692108_381007_FFFFFF_000000.png

2011-10-03 14:55:54

#3652

13/f/taiwan: Member; +940|5955

https://digg.com/story/r/nyt_on_ows_it_only_takes_20_minutes_to_shift_the_blame

2011-10-03 22:31:52

#3653

Macbeth: Banned; +2,444|5841

Cringe worthy interview. Even the fox news host know this guy is batty.

2011-10-03 22:46:03

#3654

AussieReaper: ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°); +5,761|6409|what

2011-10-04 00:07:00

#3655

Dilbert_X: The X stands for; +1,815|6362|eXtreme to the maX

Jay wrote:
DesertFox- wrote:
Jay wrote:
1+0.31=1.31

Perhaps you meant that ceo pay has increased by 231%, i.e. it more than doubled.
But that's not the case. If you say it has increased by that amount, you know it's changing (as opposed to saying the value is 100% of what it was before).

Example: Base value $100. If it changes to $150, it has increased by 50% (+ 50/100) but the value is 150% or 1.5x what it was previously. If it went to $200, it will have increased by 100% or doubled.
$100*2=$200
$100(1+1)=$200

Two ways of saying the exact same thing. It's just a matter of where you set your baseline: 0 or 100%.

DesertFox is correct, not sure what you're saying, maybe you mean by a factor of
If exec pay has increased by 131% then its 231% of what it was before.
If shareholder return has increased by 31% then its 131% of what it was before.

Last edited by Dilbert_X (2011-10-04 05:13:39)

Fuck Israel

2011-10-04 00:10:06

#3656

Beduin: Compensation of Reactive Power in the grid; +510|6006|شمال

lol

الشعب يريد اسقاط النظام
...show me the schematic

2011-10-04 03:04:11

#3657

FEOS: Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate; +1,182|6667|'Murka

Macbeth wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1eF6vCv13bw
Cringe worthy interview. Even the fox news host know this guy is batty.

Example from the "other side" why celebrity political views aren't worth shit.

“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular

2011-10-04 03:07:22

#3658

FEOS: Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate; +1,182|6667|'Murka

Dilbert_X wrote:
Jay wrote:
DesertFox- wrote:

But that's not the case. If you say it has increased by that amount, you know it's changing (as opposed to saying the value is 100% of what it was before).

Example: Base value $100. If it changes to $50, it has increased by 50% (+ 50/100) but the value is 150% or 1.5x what it was previously. If it went to $200, it will have increased by 100% or doubled.
$100*2=$200
$100(1+1)=$200

Two ways of saying the exact same thing. It's just a matter of where you set your baseline: 0 or 100%.
DesertFox is correct, not sure what you're saying, maybe you mean by a factor of
If exec pay has increased by 131% then its 231% of what it was before.
If shareholder return has increased by 31% then its 131% of what it was before.

Sorry, but if $100 changes to $50, it has not increased by any amount. It has decreased by 50%.

Because nobody caught that, the rest of the argument has no value.

“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular

2011-10-04 03:32:31

#3659

Dilbert_X: The X stands for; +1,815|6362|eXtreme to the maX

Missed it because we were talking about increases.
Replace 'changes to' with 'increases by'.

Either way 131 =/= 31

Fuck Israel

2011-10-04 05:07:33

#3660

DesertFox-: The very model of a modern major general; +796|6941|United States of America

FEOS wrote:
Dilbert_X wrote:
Jay wrote:

$100*2=$200
$100(1+1)=$200

Two ways of saying the exact same thing. It's just a matter of where you set your baseline: 0 or 100%.
DesertFox is correct, not sure what you're saying, maybe you mean by a factor of
If exec pay has increased by 131% then its 231% of what it was before.
If shareholder return has increased by 31% then its 131% of what it was before.
Sorry, but if $100 changes to $50, it has not increased by any amount. It has decreased by 50%.

Because nobody caught that, the rest of the argument has no value.

Fixed. Soz for confusion.

2011-10-04 11:11:34

#3661

13urnzz: Banned; +5,830|6753

https://static.bf2s.com/files/user/21025/ss/christie-main.jpg

2011-10-04 11:23:32

#3662

unnamednewbie13: Moderator; +2,053|7028|PNW

FEOS wrote:
Macbeth wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1eF6vCv13bw
Cringe worthy interview. Even the fox news host know this guy is batty.
Example from the "other side" why celebrity political views aren't worth shit.

Except Hitler was actually popular while he was in power. Obama's numbers...

I bet Herman Cain facepalmed when this guy endorsed him.

2011-10-04 11:33:18

#3663

Shocking: sorry you feel that way; +333|6255|...

FEOS wrote:
Shocking wrote:
Well then, to paraphrase: the national security strategy which demands 11 carriers is completely unnecessary and ridiculous.
No. The national security strategy that demands 11 carrier strike groups (much more than 11 carriers) must be revised if we are serious about cutting defense structure in a responsible way. And doing so involves negotiations with allies worldwide, as it impacts their security interests, as well. What we no longer spend, they will have to.

I realise that there's much more to carrier warfare than just having a carrier.

I'm not advocating the view that the US should cut its defense budget in half from one day to the next, but there are certain parts of the national security strategy that are ridiculous. You may argue it's based on rationale but I don't see the point and/or benefit in maintaining a military that has the capability to be involved in 4 if not 5 conflicts around the world simultaneously. After the cold war, the single biggest threat to world stability disintegrated and, logically, countries decreased the sizes of their militaries... except the US. The US decided to increase spending for god knows what reason and now you have a blue water navy the size of all of the other 'world power' navies combined + more.

I seriously doubt that your nation continually increased the military's budget and size solely because foreign nations asked you to, actually, I seriously doubt foreign powers even asked for that. Pre-2001, I'm sure they haven't, after 2001, I'm sure they requested emphasis on unconventional warfare which doesn't include building or maintaining more carrier strike groups (that just being one, albeit large, aspect of your military's capabilities). Plus, unconventional warfare doesn't require an increase in the budget, just a switch in emphasis and it's actually cheaper too.

Oh by the way I remember you were reading a book on Subudai some time ago, what was it called? I've read some stuff about him and he piqued my interest in the Mongols.

Last edited by Shocking (2011-10-04 12:36:46)

inane little opines

2011-10-04 14:23:43

#3664

FEOS: Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate; +1,182|6667|'Murka

You seem to forget that we cut defense spending dramatically post Cold War (peace dividend ring any bells?). It didn't ramp up until after 9/11.

“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular

2011-10-04 16:02:33

#3665

Shocking: sorry you feel that way; +333|6255|...

Ups, I'll concede the point. Didn't correct for inflation. Nevertheless the point about its enormous (unnecessary) capabilities still stand.

What was the book about Subutai you were reading called?

Last edited by Shocking (2011-10-04 16:06:43)

inane little opines

2011-10-04 16:06:33

#3666

Macbeth: Banned; +2,444|5841

Subutai was amazing. It's too bad he doesn't get the mainstream attention of the other great conquerors.

2011-10-04 16:07:00

#3667

Shocking: sorry you feel that way; +333|6255|...

hannibal barca kind of amazing

inane little opines

2011-10-04 17:27:11

#3668

FEOS: Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate; +1,182|6667|'Murka

Shocking wrote:
Ups, I'll concede the point. Didn't correct for inflation. Nevertheless the point about its enormous (unnecessary) capabilities still stand.

What was the book about Subutai you were reading called?

Lords of the Bow (I think) by Conn Iggulden. Actually more about Genghis Khan, but Tsubodai played a significant role.

“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular

2011-10-04 17:50:45

#3669

Macbeth: Banned; +2,444|5841

Historical fiction

2011-10-04 20:53:18

#3670

FatherTed: xD; +3,936|6756|so randum

please never cite the daily mail again;

http://www.butireaditinthepaper.co.uk/2 … epic-fail/

Small hourglass island
Always raining and foggy
Use an umbrella

2011-10-05 03:10:09

#3671

FEOS: Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate; +1,182|6667|'Murka

Macbeth wrote:
Historical fiction

Nothing wrong with good, accurate historical fiction (ie, work that leans more heavily on the "history" than on the "fiction"). Iggulden's work is well-researched, and maps with historical facts quite well.

“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular

2011-10-05 03:44:02

#3672

Dilbert_X: The X stands for; +1,815|6362|eXtreme to the maX

Yeah but so does the bible.

Fuck Israel

2011-10-05 03:47:04

#3673

FEOS: Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate; +1,182|6667|'Murka

Dilbert_X wrote:
Yeah but so does the bible.

Best selling book of all time...

“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular

2011-10-05 04:37:54

#3674

Macbeth: Banned; +2,444|5841

FEOS wrote:
Macbeth wrote:
Historical fiction
Nothing wrong with good, accurate historical fiction (ie, work that leans more heavily on the "history" than on the "fiction"). Iggulden's work is well-researched, and maps with historical facts quite well.

How does it handle the Jochi issue?

2011-10-05 05:24:57

#3675

Dilbert_X: The X stands for; +1,815|6362|eXtreme to the maX

FEOS wrote:
Dilbert_X wrote:
Yeah but so does the bible.
Best selling book of all time...

Only because its required reading for so many

Fuck Israel

BF2S Forums DAST Chat

Jay wrote:

DesertFox- wrote:

Jay wrote:

Macbeth wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

Jay wrote:

DesertFox- wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

Jay wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Macbeth wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Shocking wrote:

Shocking wrote:

Macbeth wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Macbeth wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

Board footer