No, the problem is easier, .5 is the border case. Having two of them in the calculation, using simple rounding, will cause error. There is a more advanced form of rounding where .5 either rounds up or down depending on the even or odd nature of the digit that preceeds it. This tends to correct the double .5 error.Metsfanmax wrote:Your statement is correct, but in a nation of 308,745,538 people, in order for your statement to be relevant, the fractions would need to be exactly, say, 27.5%, 12.5%, or 29.5%. Since those percentages of 308,745,538 all include some fraction of a person, we can safely discount that possibility. Thus the rounding was done incorrectly.
Live Blogging the Census!
Moderator: Community Team
Forum rules
Please read the Community Guidelines before posting.
Please read the Community Guidelines before posting.
-
tzor
- Posts: 4051
- Joined: Thu Feb 22, 2007 9:43 pm
- Gender: Male
- Location: Long Island, NY, USA
- Contact:
Re: Live Blogging the Census!

- Metsfanmax
- Posts: 6619
- Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 11:01 pm
- Gender: Male
Re: Live Blogging the Census!
Those are still arbitrary constructions, and don't matter at the point where having .5 is either impossible due to the numerology involved, or is statistically incredibly unlikely.tzor wrote:No, the problem is easier, .5 is the border case. Having two of them in the calculation, using simple rounding, will cause error. There is a more advanced form of rounding where .5 either rounds up or down depending on the even or odd nature of the digit that preceeds it. This tends to correct the double .5 error.Metsfanmax wrote:Your statement is correct, but in a nation of 308,745,538 people, in order for your statement to be relevant, the fractions would need to be exactly, say, 27.5%, 12.5%, or 29.5%. Since those percentages of 308,745,538 all include some fraction of a person, we can safely discount that possibility. Thus the rounding was done incorrectly.
- thegreekdog
- Posts: 7246
- Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 6:55 am
- Gender: Male
- Location: Philadelphia
Re: Live Blogging the Census!
MAAAATHHHH!!!! NOOOOOOOOO!!!!! LEAVE ME ALONE!
It does depend on counties in New York. It also depends in New Jersey and Pennsylvania. Southern New Jersey is fairly conservative, so is the "Republican T" in Pennsylvania (i.e. everywhere except Philadelphia and Pittsburgh).
It does depend on counties in New York. It also depends in New Jersey and Pennsylvania. Southern New Jersey is fairly conservative, so is the "Republican T" in Pennsylvania (i.e. everywhere except Philadelphia and Pittsburgh).
-
Army of GOD
- Posts: 7178
- Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 4:30 pm
- Gender: Male
Re: Live Blogging the Census!
Then who's wrong, the Census? Saxi?Metsfanmax wrote:Those are still arbitrary constructions, and don't matter at the point where having .5 is either impossible due to the numerology involved, or is statistically incredibly unlikely.tzor wrote:No, the problem is easier, .5 is the border case. Having two of them in the calculation, using simple rounding, will cause error. There is a more advanced form of rounding where .5 either rounds up or down depending on the even or odd nature of the digit that preceeds it. This tends to correct the double .5 error.Metsfanmax wrote:Your statement is correct, but in a nation of 308,745,538 people, in order for your statement to be relevant, the fractions would need to be exactly, say, 27.5%, 12.5%, or 29.5%. Since those percentages of 308,745,538 all include some fraction of a person, we can safely discount that possibility. Thus the rounding was done incorrectly.
How dare you call Saxi wrong?
mrswdk is a ho
- Metsfanmax
- Posts: 6619
- Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 11:01 pm
- Gender: Male
Re: Live Blogging the Census!
At the risk of being censured by the unofficial CC happiness ombudsman, I'm going to have say yes, Saxi's wrong...Army of GOD wrote:Then who's wrong, the Census? Saxi?Metsfanmax wrote:Those are still arbitrary constructions, and don't matter at the point where having .5 is either impossible due to the numerology involved, or is statistically incredibly unlikely.tzor wrote:No, the problem is easier, .5 is the border case. Having two of them in the calculation, using simple rounding, will cause error. There is a more advanced form of rounding where .5 either rounds up or down depending on the even or odd nature of the digit that preceeds it. This tends to correct the double .5 error.Metsfanmax wrote:Your statement is correct, but in a nation of 308,745,538 people, in order for your statement to be relevant, the fractions would need to be exactly, say, 27.5%, 12.5%, or 29.5%. Since those percentages of 308,745,538 all include some fraction of a person, we can safely discount that possibility. Thus the rounding was done incorrectly.
How dare you call Saxi wrong?
-
Army of GOD
- Posts: 7178
- Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 4:30 pm
- Gender: Male
-
spurgistan
- Posts: 1868
- Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 11:30 pm
Re: Live Blogging the Census!
And one very confusing sentence.john9blue wrote:ITT: a tax attorney schools an m.s. physics student in math
Edit: ok, I read "schools" as referring to academic institutions. I need to be more street.
I do feel that metsfan is kinda right here, the chances that two of the numbers end in exactly one half a percent is pretty slim.
Mr_Adams wrote:You, sir, are an idiot.
Timminz wrote:By that logic, you eat babies.
Re: Live Blogging the Census!
for example:
unrounded: 39.7% + 29.7% + 30.6% = 100%
rounded: 40% + 30% + 31% = 101%
that's where the discrepancy lies
edit: or to use saxi's example...
unrounded: 29.8% + 27.7% + 29.9% + 12.6% = 100%
rounded: 30% + 28% + 30% + 13% = 101%
double edit: either that OR there are people with honorary college degrees that haven't graduated high school.
unrounded: 39.7% + 29.7% + 30.6% = 100%
rounded: 40% + 30% + 31% = 101%
that's where the discrepancy lies
edit: or to use saxi's example...
unrounded: 29.8% + 27.7% + 29.9% + 12.6% = 100%
rounded: 30% + 28% + 30% + 13% = 101%
double edit: either that OR there are people with honorary college degrees that haven't graduated high school.
natty_dread wrote:Do ponies have sex?
(proud member of the Occasionally Wrongly Banned)Army of GOD wrote:the term heterosexual is offensive. I prefer to be called "normal"
Re: Live Blogging the Census!
You know what's a useful skill, nightstrike? Being able to think for oneself. Let's stop assuming for one sec that all people in blue states are liberals and all people in red states are conservatives. There's demographics and then there's generalisations. I have no doubt that you have been spoon fed the story of the stampede of liberals who are moving states, voting and destroying the states behind them. Why does it have to be that reason though?Night Strike wrote:Enjoy ignoring facts? Illinois and New York are states dominated by liberals, yet they lost people. Texas is a very conservative state and Florida has no state income tax. Both gained in population. Liberal states of California, New York, and Illinois have the largest state deficits in the country. Conservative states are either balanced or run surpluses. New Jersey was massively in a deficit, and a conservative governor has begun to restore order to their fiscal situation. Liberal spending policies have bankrupted the states that they have been living in, so now they're moving on to other states and naively thinking the same policies won't bankrupt those states.karel wrote:Night Strike wrote:Biggest headline: people are moving out of democratic states into republican states. Hopefully they don't keep those same values that have been tearing down the states they left.
whatever
It could be that conservatives in blue states, convinced by partisan politics that their state is embarking on socialism etc, are leaving for red states. Things have been getting very divided now especially on key issues.
Another thing that you could notice is the urban vs rural split, though that is commonly related to political affiliation. New York is an expensive place to live and perhaps people who are unemployed or cannot afford a place in an expensive urban location are moving to cheaper rural ones.
It also could be due to age. As most people know, the population of most western countries is ageing, that is the elderly are an increasing proportion of the overall population. This movement could be due to retirements.
It could be due to job demand being down in urban locations, leading to a then expected migration towards rural areas perhaps.
My point is, rather than blindly accepting what you'e been told about events you should think for yourself. The facts are so far pretty bare and it's pretty hard to be sure of what the main motivating factor is, hint people could be moving for different reasons.
Re: Live Blogging the Census!
OMFG Poindexter ... I'm gonna haze the shit outta you.Metsfanmax wrote:Your statement is correct, but in a nation of 308,745,538 people, in order for your statement to be relevant, the fractions would need to be exactly, say, 27.5%, 12.5%, or 29.5%. Since those percentages of 308,745,538 all include some fraction of a person, we can safely discount that possibility. Thus the rounding was done incorrectly.thegreekdog wrote:So I'm wrong? I'm so confused.Army of GOD wrote:Leave the math to math people, you lawyer.thegreekdog wrote:49.5% rounded up is 50%.
50.5% rounded up is 51%.
49.5% plus 50.5% is 100%.
50% plus 51% is 101%.
Yes, I should have rounded using a logarithmic scale considering the set size.
But I'm still gonna haze the shit outta you!
Pack Rat wrote:if it quacks like a duck and walk like a duck, it's still fascism
https://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewt ... 0#p5349880
Re: Live Blogging the Census!
in this thread or in the census?john9blue wrote: double edit: either that OR there are people with honorary college degrees that haven't graduated high school.
Re: Live Blogging the Census!
i wonder if papers filled out as other people, such as bob dylan really count... i wonder
-
skipopidid
- Posts: 46
- Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2010 1:38 am
- Gender: Female
Re: Live Blogging the Census!
InkL0sed wrote:in this thread or in the census?john9blue wrote: double edit: either that OR there are people with honorary college degrees that haven't graduated high school.
well.. after working for the census i know that the latter is possible... and i'm fairly certain after reading enough on these forums that there is a good possibility that this thread probably has some too.
- Metsfanmax
- Posts: 6619
- Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 11:01 pm
- Gender: Male
Re: Live Blogging the Census!
The "discrepancy" is that people round when they shouldn't. When you round to the nearest percentage as saxi did, you get numbers that don't add to 100%. The point isn't that saxi managed to incorrectly round up and/or down, it's that by rounding, he got numbers that added up to 101%, which makes no sense.john9blue wrote:for example:
unrounded: 39.7% + 29.7% + 30.6% = 100%
rounded: 40% + 30% + 31% = 101%
that's where the discrepancy lies
edit: or to use saxi's example...
unrounded: 29.8% + 27.7% + 29.9% + 12.6% = 100%
rounded: 30% + 28% + 30% + 13% = 101%
double edit: either that OR there are people with honorary college degrees that haven't graduated high school.
Re: Live Blogging the Census!
Metsfanmax wrote:The "discrepancy" is that people round when they shouldn't. When you round to the nearest percentage as saxi did, you get numbers that don't add to 100%. The point isn't that saxi managed to incorrectly round up and/or down, it's that by rounding, he got numbers that added up to 101%, which makes no sense.john9blue wrote:for example:
unrounded: 39.7% + 29.7% + 30.6% = 100%
rounded: 40% + 30% + 31% = 101%
that's where the discrepancy lies
edit: or to use saxi's example...
unrounded: 29.8% + 27.7% + 29.9% + 12.6% = 100%
rounded: 30% + 28% + 30% + 13% = 101%
double edit: either that OR there are people with honorary college degrees that haven't graduated high school.
keep talking, Susan
Pack Rat wrote:if it quacks like a duck and walk like a duck, it's still fascism
https://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewt ... 0#p5349880
Re: Live Blogging the Census!
True, but you're still an idiot..Metsfanmax wrote:The "discrepancy" is that people round when they shouldn't. When you round to the nearest percentage as saxi did, you get numbers that don't add to 100%. The point isn't that saxi managed to incorrectly round up and/or down, it's that by rounding, he got numbers that added up to 101%, which makes no sense.john9blue wrote:for example:
unrounded: 39.7% + 29.7% + 30.6% = 100%
rounded: 40% + 30% + 31% = 101%
that's where the discrepancy lies
edit: or to use saxi's example...
unrounded: 29.8% + 27.7% + 29.9% + 12.6% = 100%
rounded: 30% + 28% + 30% + 13% = 101%
double edit: either that OR there are people with honorary college degrees that haven't graduated high school.
Spazz Arcane wrote:If birds could swim and fish could fly I would awaken in the morning to the sturgeons cry. If fish could fly and birds could swim I'd still use worms to fish for them.
saxitoxin wrote:I'm on Team GabonX
- Metsfanmax
- Posts: 6619
- Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 11:01 pm
- Gender: Male
Re: Live Blogging the Census!
I am an idiot, you're right. I'm an idiot because I keep on convincing myself that it might possibly be worth my time to click the "show this user's post" link when I see you post. I think I'll be done with that.GabonX wrote:True, but you're still an idiot..Metsfanmax wrote:The "discrepancy" is that people round when they shouldn't. When you round to the nearest percentage as saxi did, you get numbers that don't add to 100%. The point isn't that saxi managed to incorrectly round up and/or down, it's that by rounding, he got numbers that added up to 101%, which makes no sense.john9blue wrote:for example:
unrounded: 39.7% + 29.7% + 30.6% = 100%
rounded: 40% + 30% + 31% = 101%
that's where the discrepancy lies
edit: or to use saxi's example...
unrounded: 29.8% + 27.7% + 29.9% + 12.6% = 100%
rounded: 30% + 28% + 30% + 13% = 101%
double edit: either that OR there are people with honorary college degrees that haven't graduated high school.
-
Army of GOD
- Posts: 7178
- Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 4:30 pm
- Gender: Male
Re: Live Blogging the Census!
You're also an idiot for reading this post and thinking this was going to be any addition to the discussion in this thread
mrswdk is a ho
Re: Live Blogging the Census!
And you're an idiot to think I'm kidding in this post.Army of GOD wrote:You're also an idiot for reading this post and thinking this was going to be any addition to the discussion in this thread
- Metsfanmax
- Posts: 6619
- Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 11:01 pm
- Gender: Male
Re: Live Blogging the Census!
you got meArmy of GOD wrote:You're also an idiot for reading this post and thinking this was going to be any addition to the discussion in this thread
Re: Live Blogging the Census!
accuracy and ease of comprehension of the individual percentages is more important than having them add up to 100 when the occasional person decides to do the math without knowing that they are roundedMetsfanmax wrote:The "discrepancy" is that people round when they shouldn't. When you round to the nearest percentage as saxi did, you get numbers that don't add to 100%. The point isn't that saxi managed to incorrectly round up and/or down, it's that by rounding, he got numbers that added up to 101%, which makes no sense.
imo
natty_dread wrote:Do ponies have sex?
(proud member of the Occasionally Wrongly Banned)Army of GOD wrote:the term heterosexual is offensive. I prefer to be called "normal"
Re: Live Blogging the Census!
GabonX wrote:idiot
Metsfanmax wrote:idiot
Army of God wrote:idiot
bros, chillax ... no use having a whose is bigger contest when Saxi's in the thread; it'll just be a battle for second placeinkL0sed wrote:idiot
Pack Rat wrote:if it quacks like a duck and walk like a duck, it's still fascism
https://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewt ... 0#p5349880
Re: Live Blogging the Census!
metsfan: your thoughts on rounding discrepancies are misplaced. That kind of stuff happens all the time, when dealing with percentages.
- Metsfanmax
- Posts: 6619
- Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 11:01 pm
- Gender: Male
Re: Live Blogging the Census!
Are you kidding? I would think that blaming saxi for something would be the perfect place for me to vent my anger over rounding issues.Timminz wrote:metsfan: your thoughts on rounding discrepancies are misplaced. That kind of stuff happens all the time, when dealing with percentages.
Re: Live Blogging the Census!
fuckin rounding, how does it work??
natty_dread wrote:Do ponies have sex?
(proud member of the Occasionally Wrongly Banned)Army of GOD wrote:the term heterosexual is offensive. I prefer to be called "normal"

