Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Off to Westminster to give evidence before the House of Lords

13»

Comments

  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,715
    Dura_Ace said:

    Please conduct yourselves with decorum, PB Tories.

    https://twitter.com/camusson/status/920228197052149761

    Ruth will finally reach the apogee of her brand of ersatz bonhomie.

    She is easily the best retail politician in the UK but she's tested EU+ and is therefore unacceptable to the Horde.
    doing half bake souffles on a cretinous baking tv show is just about right for her, keep he going to Big Brother or In the Jungle beckons.
  • StereotomyStereotomy Posts: 4,092

    rkrkrk said:

    Pong said:

    I don't see why crossing the x axis should have any impact on the rounding convention used.

    logically, the minus shouldn't make any difference. -0.5 rounds up to 0, -0.51 rounds down to -1

    Shirley?
    I'd have said the exact opposite... 0.5 is closer to 1... so -0.5 is closer to -1.
    Surely you have to be symmetrical around the x=0 axis.
    Only if there's something magically special about 0. Being consistent if you round up then 0 is up on -0.5

    If you view a set of numbers to two decimal places then:

    4 is the range 3.50 to 4.49 (100 numbers to 2 decimal places)
    3 is the range 2.50 to 3.49 (100 numbers to 2 decimal places)
    2 is the range 1.50 to 2.49 (100 numbers to 2 decimal places)
    1 is the range 0.50 to 1.49 (100 numbers to 2 decimal places)

    So logically and consistently
    0 should be the range -0.50 to 0.49 (100 numbers to 2 decimal places)

    Otherwise 0 contains a range of just 99 numbers to 2 decimal places and I see no reason why it should. The core of mathematics is to be consistent in how you treat your numbers.
    I think the standards are rounding to even (accountants' rounding), or rounding away from zero. Those are the options in the programming language I use, for example. Excel also apparently rounds away from zero (though I'm on my phone, so I can't check)

    But really, this isn't maths, it's just about choosing between conventions. Pick whichever one works for your situation. There's no right and wrong, just useful and useless.
  • MTimTMTimT Posts: 7,034

    MTimT said:

    Pong said:

    Good luck.

    Apologies for the negativity but.... I really don't think polling/election predictions/psephology is something the lords should consider official business. Leave it to the electoral commission/BPC etc.

    There's an insane amount of really difficult, dull but essential brexit scrutiny for the lords to be getting on with. They should be working overtime on economic impact assessments and whatnot.

    Hope the day goes well, anyway. I don't blame you for accepting the invitation!

    The couple of times I've seen you on TV you came across pretty well.

    It's of political interest because of the view that polls should be banned in the final week(s), as in many other countries.

    Then we'd get the tweets saying things like:

    Latest fruit prices:
    Redcurrants 42p/100g
    Blueberries 38p/100g
    Yellow bananas 7p/100g
    Scottish raspberries 4p/100g
    Greengages 2p/100g

    I am struggling for a suitable fruit to represent the Kippers!
    Seaweed?

    Seaweed is a fruit? Who knew?

    No, not a fruit. Just the non-meat edible that first came to mind.

    Going with the colour/fruit match, maybe damsons.
  • NEW THREAD

  • MarkHopkinsMarkHopkins Posts: 5,584
    edited October 2017

    new thread

  • MTimTMTimT Posts: 7,034
    nielh said:

    Pong said:

    I don't see why crossing the x axis should have any impact on the rounding convention used.

    logically, the minus shouldn't make any difference. -0.5 rounds up to 0, -0.51 rounds down to -1

    Shirley?
    I'm unsure that there's any convention over this wrt rounding up, down, away from zero etc. But as an engineer, there's a danger in saying '0' when '-0.5' is meant. Zero is taken too readily to mean nothing is present, when there is actually something present. Likewise, there might be a special meaning in the fact it is negative. Hence, in the absence of any other rules, I would round down to -1. Likewise, with +0.5 I would round up to +1.
    What if it was - 0.4?
    If the mere fact that it is negative is important, then you cannot have a rounding to integer rule. Round to a tenth, not integer. The round rule interval has to match the sensitivity of the system.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,914
    nielh said:

    Pong said:

    I don't see why crossing the x axis should have any impact on the rounding convention used.

    logically, the minus shouldn't make any difference. -0.5 rounds up to 0, -0.51 rounds down to -1

    Shirley?
    I'm unsure that there's any convention over this wrt rounding up, down, away from zero etc. But as an engineer, there's a danger in saying '0' when '-0.5' is meant. Zero is taken too readily to mean nothing is present, when there is actually something present. Likewise, there might be a special meaning in the fact it is negative. Hence, in the absence of any other rules, I would round down to -1. Likewise, with +0.5 I would round up to +1.
    What if it was - 0.4?
    If there were no rules specified, I would be tempted in certain circumstances to make it -1, as long as I clearly specified that was what I was doing.

    Say I have a set of outputs from a machine:

    0.32
    0.45
    0.57
    1.03
    0.03
    -0.40
    0.12

    The -0.40 value is interesting, especially in cases where it is important that the numbers do not go negative, or where negative cases are special. If you take the round-to-zero approach, then the one potentially-strange value in there would get lost as it is rounded up to zero.

    But again, it depends on what you are using the values for.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,715
    calum said:

    About time - Ruth's been SCON leader since 2011 !
    https://twitter.com/ConservativesGE/status/920208319645659136

    LOL,Big "Me Me" Biff and her Invisible MP's making an impact, do these idiots think we button up the back.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,715

    Freggles said:

    Wings over Scotland just got called out :lol:

    By Foulkes.

    That's that settled then.
    what has drunks assaulting old ladies and the police got to do with polling then.Is some old dodderer confused or was lunch generous.
This discussion has been closed.