Liberal Forum

Blackvegetable » 03 Dec 2025, 2:07 pm » wrote: ↑

03 Dec 2025, 2:07 pm

Just to calibrate the Intelligence, I offered a piece of my own for analysis...

AI responded as follows..

The provided text has an advanced reading level, likely at the college or post-graduate level, due to its complex vocabulary, long and involved sentence structure, and use of sophisticated, abstract concepts and cultural allusions.

 Readability Analysis
 Complex Vocabulary:
The passage uses a high density of multi-syllable and specialized words such as "literal minded," "figurative comparison," "cavil," "apparent," "iconography," "risible," "twixt," "agonizingly," "reconcile," and "manicured". Many of these words are not on common word lists for average readers, which increases the text's difficulty.

 Sentence Length and Structure:

The sentences are generally long and complex, featuring multiple clauses and parenthetical asides (e.g., "...though I won't cavil with a figurative comparison (for reasons soon to become apparent)"). Long sentences with intricate syntax typically result in a lower Flesch Reading Ease score and a higher grade level score.

 Abstract Ideas and Allusions:

The text requires a significant amount of prior knowledge to fully understand its meaning. It makes reference to:

 "Tom of Finlandization": An obscure cultural and artistic reference to the work of Finnish artist Touko Laaksonen, known for his highly stylized homoerotic art.

 "MAGA iconography": A political and cultural reference requiring knowledge of contemporary American politics and associated visual symbols.
 "Florida Man": A meme and cultural reference.

 Figurative Language:

The passage explicitly uses and distinguishes between literal and figurative comparisons, requiring the reader to understand nuanced language. 

 Conclusion

Based on standard readability formulas (like Flesch-Kincaid), the text would likely score in the "difficult to read" range, typically associated with an audience of university graduates or professionals in a specialized field. It is not suitable for a general audience (which usually reads at an 8th-grade level) without significant effort and external knowledge.

in short, totally Level 27 stuff.

Then I asked the same question, substituting "thoughts" from @Vegas  ..

• Survivorship bias is the logical error of concentrating on entities that passed a selection process while overlooking those that did not.
• Scenario C exemplifies this bias because it focuses only on the "survivors" (successful founders featured in the media) and ignores the many who failed. This leads to the incorrect conclusion that entrepreneurship is easy, as all the visible examples made it work.
• To avoid this bias, one should also study the failures and the challenges faced by those who did not succeed. 

• A) Believing that reading business books increases revenue after finding many CEOs recommend them: While potentially an example of correlation not proving causation, it does not fit survivorship bias perfectly, as the advice from both successful and unsuccessful CEOs might be available, even if only successful ones are prominent. The core issue of survivorship bias is missing data, not just misinterpreting the available data.
• B) Concluding that most startups fail after analyzing bankrupt companies: This is the opposite of survivorship bias. It focuses only on the failures, ignoring the successful companies. This would lead to an overly pessimistic view.
• D) Surveying customers to understand why they chose your product over competitors: This is a standard market research practice and is not an example of survivorship bias in the context of general business success. It focuses on the specific reasons for customer choice among those who are already customers. It might have other biases (e.g., self-selection bias in who responds to the survey), but not the classic survivorship bias of ignoring entire categories of missing data (e.g., failed companies) when evaluating overall business success. 

JohnnyYou » 03 Dec 2025, 5:53 pm » wrote: ↑

03 Dec 2025, 5:53 pm

The Moody Blues...

AI OverviewThe correct option is 
C. Thinking entrepreneurship is easy because most media profiles focus on successful founders. 
Explanation

• Survivorship bias is the logical error of concentrating on entities that passed a selection process while overlooking those that did not.
• Scenario C exemplifies this bias because it focuses only on the "survivors" (successful founders featured in the media) and ignores the many who failed. This leads to the incorrect conclusion that entrepreneurship is easy, as all the visible examples made it work.
• To avoid this bias, one should also study the failures and the challenges faced by those who did not succeed. 

Why other options are incorrect

• A) Believing that reading business books increases revenue after finding many CEOs recommend them: While potentially an example of correlation not proving causation, it does not fit survivorship bias perfectly, as the advice from both successful and unsuccessful CEOs might be available, even if only successful ones are prominent. The core issue of survivorship bias is missing data, not just misinterpreting the available data.
• B) Concluding that most startups fail after analyzing bankrupt companies: This is the opposite of survivorship bias. It focuses only on the failures, ignoring the successful companies. This would lead to an overly pessimistic view.
• D) Surveying customers to understand why they chose your product over competitors: This is a standard market research practice and is not an example of survivorship bias in the context of general business success. It focuses on the specific reasons for customer choice among those who are already customers. It might have other biases (e.g., self-selection bias in who responds to the survey), but not the classic survivorship bias of ignoring entire categories of missing data (e.g., failed companies) when evaluating overall business success. 

Mrkelly » 03 Dec 2025, 6:06 pm » wrote: ↑

03 Dec 2025, 6:06 pm

Blackvegetable » 03 Dec 2025, 6:14 pm » wrote: ↑

03 Dec 2025, 6:14 pm

Now that it has once again been defined, challenge @Vegas  to come up with an example.

Mrkelly » 03 Dec 2025, 6:27 pm » wrote: ↑

03 Dec 2025, 6:27 pm

I’d rather not

Blackvegetable » 03 Dec 2025, 2:07 pm » wrote: ↑

03 Dec 2025, 2:07 pm

Just to calibrate the Intelligence, I offered a piece of my own for analysis...

AI responded as follows..

The provided text has an advanced reading level, likely at the college or post-graduate level, due to its complex vocabulary, long and involved sentence structure, and use of sophisticated, abstract concepts and cultural allusions.

 Readability Analysis
 Complex Vocabulary:
The passage uses a high density of multi-syllable and specialized words such as "literal minded," "figurative comparison," "cavil," "apparent," "iconography," "risible," "twixt," "agonizingly," "reconcile," and "manicured". Many of these words are not on common word lists for average readers, which increases the text's difficulty.

 Sentence Length and Structure:

The sentences are generally long and complex, featuring multiple clauses and parenthetical asides (e.g., "...though I won't cavil with a figurative comparison (for reasons soon to become apparent)"). Long sentences with intricate syntax typically result in a lower Flesch Reading Ease score and a higher grade level score.

 Abstract Ideas and Allusions:

The text requires a significant amount of prior knowledge to fully understand its meaning. It makes reference to:

 "Tom of Finlandization": An obscure cultural and artistic reference to the work of Finnish artist Touko Laaksonen, known for his highly stylized homoerotic art.

 "MAGA iconography": A political and cultural reference requiring knowledge of contemporary American politics and associated visual symbols.
 "Florida Man": A meme and cultural reference.

 Figurative Language:

The passage explicitly uses and distinguishes between literal and figurative comparisons, requiring the reader to understand nuanced language. 

 Conclusion

Based on standard readability formulas (like Flesch-Kincaid), the text would likely score in the "difficult to read" range, typically associated with an audience of university graduates or professionals in a specialized field. It is not suitable for a general audience (which usually reads at an 8th-grade level) without significant effort and external knowledge.

in short, totally Level 27 stuff.

Then I asked the same question, substituting "thoughts" from @Vegas  ..

JuCo 5 percenter...72 “Show me the man and I’ll find you the crime” ~ LAVRENTIY BERIA "Try to get past your passionate ignorance and learn to accept what actually happened." ~ brown's unheeded words of wisdom If gender is not sex, why should a gender claim change what sex you shower with? "Libruls are often fascists on vacation..."

Blackvegetable » 03 Dec 2025, 3:07 pm » wrote: ↑

03 Dec 2025, 3:07 pm

Am I too cruel?

JuCo 5 percenter...72 “Show me the man and I’ll find you the crime” ~ LAVRENTIY BERIA "Try to get past your passionate ignorance and learn to accept what actually happened." ~ brown's unheeded words of wisdom If gender is not sex, why should a gender claim change what sex you shower with? "Libruls are often fascists on vacation..."

ROG62 » 04 Dec 2025, 6:40 am » wrote: ↑

04 Dec 2025, 6:40 am

so brown, who 'splained it to you?

ROG62 » 04 Dec 2025, 6:42 am » wrote: ↑

04 Dec 2025, 6:42 am

no, just too **** stupid...

Blackvegetable » 03 Dec 2025, 2:07 pm » wrote: ↑

03 Dec 2025, 2:07 pm

Just to calibrate the Intelligence, I offered a piece of my own for analysis...

AI responded as follows..

The provided text has an advanced reading level, likely at the college or post-graduate level, due to its complex vocabulary, long and involved sentence structure, and use of sophisticated, abstract concepts and cultural allusions.

 Readability Analysis
 Complex Vocabulary:
The passage uses a high density of multi-syllable and specialized words such as "literal minded," "figurative comparison," "cavil," "apparent," "iconography," "risible," "twixt," "agonizingly," "reconcile," and "manicured". Many of these words are not on common word lists for average readers, which increases the text's difficulty.

 Sentence Length and Structure:

The sentences are generally long and complex, featuring multiple clauses and parenthetical asides (e.g., "...though I won't cavil with a figurative comparison (for reasons soon to become apparent)"). Long sentences with intricate syntax typically result in a lower Flesch Reading Ease score and a higher grade level score.

 Abstract Ideas and Allusions:

The text requires a significant amount of prior knowledge to fully understand its meaning. It makes reference to:

 "Tom of Finlandization": An obscure cultural and artistic reference to the work of Finnish artist Touko Laaksonen, known for his highly stylized homoerotic art.

 "MAGA iconography": A political and cultural reference requiring knowledge of contemporary American politics and associated visual symbols.
 "Florida Man": A meme and cultural reference.

 Figurative Language:

The passage explicitly uses and distinguishes between literal and figurative comparisons, requiring the reader to understand nuanced language. 

 Conclusion

Based on standard readability formulas (like Flesch-Kincaid), the text would likely score in the "difficult to read" range, typically associated with an audience of university graduates or professionals in a specialized field. It is not suitable for a general audience (which usually reads at an 8th-grade level) without significant effort and external knowledge.

in short, totally Level 27 stuff.

Then I asked the same question, substituting "thoughts" from @Vegas  ..

nefarious101 » 04 Dec 2025, 7:28 am » wrote: ↑

04 Dec 2025, 7:28 am

ROTFLMFAO...

The Dickhead is gone nuclear....how long before AI finds out it's dealing with a full blown Dickhead?

I see the dickhead is going the way of the "Educated Idiot"..

hey AI grade "grade this home work from a mean man on the internet"....hopefully it will help the dickhead feel less stupid

Hey Dickhead!!...........

You got your *** has gotten handed back so many times that your sphincter is set on Auto-Pucker 

Blackvegetable » 04 Dec 2025, 7:46 am » wrote: ↑

04 Dec 2025, 7:46 am

nefarious101 » 04 Dec 2025, 7:48 am » wrote: ↑

04 Dec 2025, 7:48 am

Cha-Ching....just crashed the dickhead's hard drive...he's back on auto-post

Blackvegetable » 04 Dec 2025, 7:51 am » wrote: ↑

04 Dec 2025, 7:51 am

Put on a brave face, Naffy...

nefarious101 » 04 Dec 2025, 7:54 am » wrote: ↑

04 Dec 2025, 7:54 am

wow dickhead....that was insightful

trans women are men
trans men are women

and Trans Alpha's are beta's

sorry dickhead....you're just pretending again

Mrkelly » 03 Dec 2025, 6:27 pm » wrote: ↑

03 Dec 2025, 6:27 pm

I’d rather not

Blackvegatble's hypcorisy summed up in one post: [/size]
Blackvegetable » 7 minutes ago » wrote: ↑7 minutes ago
Very simple questions...

From which you are running...

Blackvegetable » 03 Dec 2025, 6:14 pm » wrote: ↑

03 Dec 2025, 6:14 pm

Now that it has once again been defined, challenge @Vegas  to come up with an example.

Let me prove how predictable you narcissists are. Watch this:

1. Phase 1: You will say that you answered it.
Phase 2: I will remind you of :"are these your words?" from yesterday and if "will" is future tense. 
Phase 3: You will deny that I showed you, because of your meltdown with my link provided...and then you will say "I didn't ask for a link."
Repeat

2. Your next move will be to claim that you answered it by giving your definition, to which I replied that isn't the question...etc...etc...blah...blah...blah..

3. You will also say that you answered through your non-answers. 

Moron.

Deal: If Veghead can prove that he answered the survivorship multiple choice question, as the question is written and asked, along with his defense of his answer, then I will agree to never come back for as long as I live. If he cannot, then he is out of here for a month. Additionally, his defense cannot be "Because it fits my definition." That is a claim, not a defense. He is to defend why. 

Exception: I will allow for an exception. If he loses, then I will allow him to stay if he answers it the way it is asked, along with his defense. However, he must do it immediately after the deal has been decided. Not 100 posts later. The very next post of his must be his answer/defense.

Blackvegatble's hypcorisy summed up in one post: [/size]
Blackvegetable » 7 minutes ago » wrote: ↑7 minutes ago
Very simple questions...

From which you are running...

Vegas » 04 Dec 2025, 10:09 am » wrote: ↑

04 Dec 2025, 10:09 am

Hopefully you are smarter enough to recognize by now his blatant deflections. This is what he has been doing since this all started. Instead of answering the question, he incessantly turns it around on me demanding that I do something instead or he claims he gave the definition. The question doesn't ask for definitions or anything he keeps deflecting to. It gives 4 examples to choose from. He turns it around on me instead. Textbook narcissism. 

This will continue until he chooses an option and defends it. No number of deflections will stop it.