Suspicious-Feeling-1

Suspicious-Feeling-1 t1_jebml3f wrote

Look man I don't really want to get into it, I think it's fair to say you and I don't agree on who should be imprisoned in perpetuity. I'm definitely on the side of the argument that most people who are repeat offenders would rather not be repeat offenders. They aren't super bad people so much as folks who have had their opportunities greatly diminished by past mistakes/desperation.

8

Suspicious-Feeling-1 t1_jcdzohc wrote

It depends on what you're using ratings for. A binary of good movie / bad movie works great if you are trying to pick a movie with the highest probability of being something you would enjoy. If you want a movie to totally blow you away, an IMDB score or a tally of awards won might be more useful.

1

Suspicious-Feeling-1 t1_j2b7pqo wrote

Think the visualization is well done, I'm just not sure the underlying data is that interesting. It seems like there's no correlation between your two metrics, and we're also really just comparing the top performers. I didn't get much out of this other than a list of the top countries by primary school teachers per capita (is this even a great metric? Wouldn't per student make more sense? What about secondary and tertiary?)

11

Suspicious-Feeling-1 t1_j24o0my wrote

It's interesting you say that, one of the primary architects of the modern metric (Kuznets) had a similar critique, in that no one should use national income metrics as a shorthand for all encompassing prosperity. Totally agree on that point.

I think calling military expenditure a black hole is a little bit reductive. Many of our technological advances were at least partially accomplished by military funding. We probably wouldn't even be having this online thread without the billions of $ the US military put into ARPANET.

2