Fucktards like Pendejo and Bro Deal

Since 2001, over 90,000 cyclist's have joined Cycling Forums to discuss topics from general cycling to equipment, training, racing and travel or vacation destinations (especially in europe during the tour de france). We also feature an great deals in our online store, 100's of articles, classifieds and product reviews.

So, is it socially acceptable, now, to be as mentally lazy as them?

So, is it socially acceptable, now, to be as mentally lazy as them?
Thank you, Alienator, you just made me laugh. Really hard. You are not as useless as I first thought.

So, is it socially acceptable, now, to be as mentally lazy as them?
Why don't you tell us? You latest cluelessness as to why inusrance rates on sports cars are higher provides a great example.

Shit the old "You guys are fucktards" argument. Man that's funny. I can't even post, I'm laughing so much. I never thought the forum could be this fun.

What's Bro and Pendejo's retarded fucking ability got to do with non-random statistical parameters for the owner groups of varying automobiles?

:D :D :D

Why don't you tell us? You latest cluelessness as to why inusrance rates on sports cars are higher provides a great example.

Oh, really? Did I say that was the case? I said using insurance statistics is not a valid argument for generalizing a subset of people given that the insurance companies interpretation of their own statistics has been shown to be wrong more than a few times and that their statistical methods have also been shown to be wrong.

Alas, you wouldn't understand anything like that.

Thank you, Alienator, you just made me laugh. Really hard. You are not as useless as I first thought.

Alas, you are as useless as you seem.

Oh, really? Did I say that was the case? I said using insurance statistics is not a valid argument for generalizing a subset of people given that the insurance companies interpretation of their own statistics has been shown to be wrong more than a few times and that their statistical methods have also been shown to be wrong.

Alas, you wouldn't understand anything like that.They can be right on probabilities...wrong on outcomes (the way the dice falls). But when the whole industry is in competition with each other (you get it wrong often enough.. you're out of the club) and each insurance company is operating in a huge market where the law of large numbers sorts the errors out pretty quickly... and they are all calculating probabilities the way they do... for decades (do you think they don't have any of their own experience to base judgments on?)... I'm inclined to think that they are not way off in their calculations and are perpetuating a huge error.

But I'll help you out... because I know how much you love to be assisted by your fellow man. The one variable that interferes with the insurance rate argument... and detracts from it as a controlled test... is that repair costs for sportier cars are generally higher than standard cars for the same physical damage. Or have I just made another unfounded generalization?

Shit the old "You guys are fucktards" argument. Man that's funny. I can't even post, I'm laughing so much. I never thought the forum could be this fun.

What's Bro and Pendejo's retarded fucking ability got to do with non-random statistical parameters for the owner groups of varying automobiles?

:D :D :D


Oh, please, educated one: tell me about the non-random statistical parameters for the owners groups of varying automobiles. If they're non-random, then you're implying that there are statistical events that are not independent of certain of certain statistical outcomes. So, you're saying that there is some case, for a given make or for given makes of cars, where A⊆B, then P(B|A)=P(BA)/P(A)=1? Wow. That's one hell of a thing to deduce. You must be special.

T
But I'll help you out... because I know how much you love to be assisted by your fellow man. The one variable that interferes with the insurance rate argument... and detracts from it as a controlled test... is that repair costs for sportier cars are generally higher than standard cars for the same physical damage. Or have I just made another unfounded generalization?
A counter argument to that is that insurance companies use a very broad definition of what constitutes a sports car. Put a turbo charger on a car and the rates go up.

Oh, please, educated one: tell me about the non-random statistical parameters for the owners groups of varying automobiles. If they're non-random, then you're implying that there are statistical events that are not independent of certain of certain statistical outcomes. So, you're saying that there is some case, for a given make or for given makes of cars, where A⊆B, then P(B|A)=P(BA)/P(A)=1? Wow. That's one hell of a thing to deduce. You must be special.The dependent variables that skew a probability distribution or change its parameters... don't have to be other statistical outcomes/events.

By the way... You're impressive display of statistical math is an obvious effort to bluff lurkers into believing you have some substance to your argument. Any mathematician worthy of quoting an equation would have taken the time to define the variables.

By the way... You're impressive display of statistical math is an obvious effort to bluff lurkers into believing you have some substance to your argument.It does work most of the time, doesn't it? ;) :D

A counter argument to that is that insurance companies use a very broad definition of what constitutes a sports car. Put a turbo charger on a car and the rates go up.Put a boy in it and watch it go up some more....

Put a boy in it and watch it go up some more....
Those bigots. How dare the insurance companies use their claims data to charge more for boys than girls.

Those bigots. How dare the insurance companies use their claims data to charge more for boys than girls.
When clearly there is NO difference between a teenaged boy and girl...it's outrageous! They just made that up based on anecdotal evidence of boys turfing all the yards in the insurance agents' neighborhoods...

You know what I heard, Bro? That insurance companies are stupid enough to raise rates on people who have accidents...like that means anything. :rolleyes:

Paint it red and you also pay a higher rate.