Talk:2713: Data Point

My theory: Randall got some interesting patterns drawing stars for the previous Gravity game, and wanted to show us how cool this one looks. 172.69.134.130 10:53, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

To me this looks like The Sun from Gravity, but moreso, so you may be right. :) NiceGuy1 (talk) 07:04, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Kudos to whomever used "datum" in its correct singular form. And also a kudo to the same person for their use of "data" correctly. 172.70.179.3 12:27, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Anti-kudos for neglecting the etymology of kudos, ancient Greek κῦδος. In spite of ending in "s" it's a singular noun that means praise. Would a singular kudo be a pray or a prey? 172.70.134.94 13:14, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

The irony is sweet as a molass. 162.158.78.27 18:11, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

This reminds me of a “dad joke” my mom would make every time we had molasses out on the dining table: she would inevitably, at some point, ask me to “pass the lasses.” And I would follow the script, and say, “don’t you mean MOlasses?” To which she would reply, in her best (meaning: awful) fake southern drawl, “hows ken it be MOlasses, whens I ain’t had none yet.”John (talk) 05:25, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Molasses are one of the most irony foods they is. I have a molass to increase my iron all the time!172.71.254.26 10:07, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Oh my my, a Dad Joke delivered by a Mom. Kudos. :) NiceGuy1 (talk) 07:00, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Also anti-kudos for using "whomever" incorrectly. In this case, as the subject of the clause "who[m]ever used 'datum' in its correct singular form", the word is "whoever". The words in the clause don't change when the clause is embedded in a sentence. Jkshapiro (talk) 23:58, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

In the business of quality engineering it's all too common for the lab to be asked to neglect "bad" data points. The method is known as "Test until good." -- "Aha! You finally got one data point that says the stuff's okay. Ship it!" 172.70.134.94 13:14, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

This comic finally explains the reason for the diffraction spikes on the stars in JWST images.

to be fair, there are certain data points which are mainly important in comparison to widely understood baselines, not to other data points in the actual test. things like fusion-energy-gain numbers, rocket ISP, nuclear warhead yield, etc. For those types of results, one valid data point that breaks the previous record is all that really matters. 172.70.126.232 01:32, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Isn't there a TIE fighter in the center of the picture? --162.158.129.80 11:50, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

The usual convention is that whiskers around a solitary point are standard deviations (68% confidence intervals of normal distributions) but if they have perpendicular caps they're properly 95% confidence intervals (two standard deviations, again if the underlying data is normally distributed.) The convention for box-and-whiskers plots are different, where the whiskers are 95% confidence intervals whether they have caps or not, and the boxes are two quartiles (50% confidence intervals), and an off-center designation inside the box, by notches, or by the shape of the box represents the arithmetic mean (the median necessarily always being at the center of the box, which is often designated with a dashed line.) 172.71.158.230 03:03, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Uncapped whiskers around points can be 95%, 2σ intervals just as often as 1σ. Depend on the caption or text. 172.69.22.32 18:37, 28 December 2022 (UTC)