<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for Perpendiculous</title>
	<atom:link href="http://perpendiculo.us/?feed=comments-rss2" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://perpendiculo.us</link>
	<description>Programming, Personal Finance, and Personal musings</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 03 Mar 2010 15:10:49 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on I WANT MY F*ing Semaphores! by Valda</title>
		<link>http://perpendiculo.us/?p=42&#038;cpage=1#comment-181</link>
		<dc:creator>Valda</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Mar 2010 15:10:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://perpendiculo.us/?p=42#comment-181</guid>
		<description>MPCreateSemaphore is your friend.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>MPCreateSemaphore is your friend.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Reality Distortion Field Deflector (RDFD) by First Week -or- The Craziest Story Ever Told &#171; Perpendiculous</title>
		<link>http://perpendiculo.us/?p=155&#038;cpage=1#comment-165</link>
		<dc:creator>First Week -or- The Craziest Story Ever Told &#171; Perpendiculous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Feb 2010 05:12:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://perpendiculo.us/?p=155#comment-165</guid>
		<description>[...] what happened?  Dialing the Way Back machine back to October 2009, you may recall a certain Reality Distortion Field Deflection.  At the time, it looked like I was still Columbus bound for the time being.  However, some phone [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] what happened?  Dialing the Way Back machine back to October 2009, you may recall a certain Reality Distortion Field Deflection.  At the time, it looked like I was still Columbus bound for the time being.  However, some phone [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Vanity and prescience by Reed</title>
		<link>http://perpendiculo.us/?p=91&#038;cpage=1#comment-97</link>
		<dc:creator>Reed</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Feb 2009 18:58:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://perpendiculo.us/?p=91#comment-97</guid>
		<description>that&#039;s funny and awesome!  it&#039;s fawesome!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>that&#8217;s funny and awesome!  it&#8217;s fawesome!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Spendthrifts and unsolicited advice by George Toledo</title>
		<link>http://perpendiculo.us/?p=43&#038;cpage=1#comment-95</link>
		<dc:creator>George Toledo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Dec 2008 04:21:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://perpendiculo.us/?p=43#comment-95</guid>
		<description>(as I feel the need to add my input....)

... people have a habit of living vicariously, on various levels, through others. It is also a natural survival instinct for people to raise self worth and social value by making such suggestions. I think it is just a natural quirk of humanity. Hopefully it comes from a genuine place and not the &quot;butt-insky&quot; zone. The part about truly useful advice, that isn&#039;t rooted in materialism and instant gratification truly strikes a chord. Whatever happened to the voices of reason, the true thinkers in society? This is the age of the myopic view.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>(as I feel the need to add my input&#8230;.)</p>
<p>&#8230; people have a habit of living vicariously, on various levels, through others. It is also a natural survival instinct for people to raise self worth and social value by making such suggestions. I think it is just a natural quirk of humanity. Hopefully it comes from a genuine place and not the &#8220;butt-insky&#8221; zone. The part about truly useful advice, that isn&#8217;t rooted in materialism and instant gratification truly strikes a chord. Whatever happened to the voices of reason, the true thinkers in society? This is the age of the myopic view.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Ohio Ballot by George Toledo</title>
		<link>http://perpendiculo.us/?p=73&#038;cpage=1#comment-94</link>
		<dc:creator>George Toledo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Dec 2008 03:45:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://perpendiculo.us/?p=73#comment-94</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m waiting for the statistics post :o)

In getting my sociology degree, two of my most enlightening classes were social statistics class. For one of them, the professor&#039;s whole aim was basically to show you what it REALLY takes to get a truly representative sample, and how NO ONE EVER really does that.

It is generally agreed by the Social science community that 1500 people is a minimum starting point for a decent study. However, you have to be intelligent enough to accurately analyze any confounding factors that could skew your result (which is unfortunately very subjective).

So for many polls, what you would truly have to do, is take a poll of 1500 people from every possible subset that could skew your result, and then stratify that result to be representative of the actual population you are trying to analyze. THIS NEVER HAPPENS EVER EVER. No one wants to truly do that because it is a massive task.

If you wanted to know how a given demographic might vote, you don&#039;t just take a sample of 1500 people from that demographic. You have to break it down by subsets of that demographic (which would be a confounding factor), the region they are located in, socio-economic level, etcetera.... 1500 of each of those groups. Then, only through census reporting and other stats, can you manage to accurately extrapolate that to useable data.

Again THIS NEVER HAPPENS EVER.

What happens is that statisticians basically develop a shorthand/gut method for targeting whatever they are trying to target... and there is no real standard.

Why is it that when you hear opinion polls on the news, you rarely hear the sample number? On top of that, most exhibit horrible self selection bias... which in the hands of any organized group, can manage to skew poll data in all kinds of ways.

I&#039;m not even digging into these posted stats between you and Casey... ugh it feels like a lifetime ago already (making my head hurt).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m waiting for the statistics post <img src='http://perpendiculo.us/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_surprised.gif' alt=':o' class='wp-smiley' /> )</p>
<p>In getting my sociology degree, two of my most enlightening classes were social statistics class. For one of them, the professor&#8217;s whole aim was basically to show you what it REALLY takes to get a truly representative sample, and how NO ONE EVER really does that.</p>
<p>It is generally agreed by the Social science community that 1500 people is a minimum starting point for a decent study. However, you have to be intelligent enough to accurately analyze any confounding factors that could skew your result (which is unfortunately very subjective).</p>
<p>So for many polls, what you would truly have to do, is take a poll of 1500 people from every possible subset that could skew your result, and then stratify that result to be representative of the actual population you are trying to analyze. THIS NEVER HAPPENS EVER EVER. No one wants to truly do that because it is a massive task.</p>
<p>If you wanted to know how a given demographic might vote, you don&#8217;t just take a sample of 1500 people from that demographic. You have to break it down by subsets of that demographic (which would be a confounding factor), the region they are located in, socio-economic level, etcetera&#8230;. 1500 of each of those groups. Then, only through census reporting and other stats, can you manage to accurately extrapolate that to useable data.</p>
<p>Again THIS NEVER HAPPENS EVER.</p>
<p>What happens is that statisticians basically develop a shorthand/gut method for targeting whatever they are trying to target&#8230; and there is no real standard.</p>
<p>Why is it that when you hear opinion polls on the news, you rarely hear the sample number? On top of that, most exhibit horrible self selection bias&#8230; which in the hands of any organized group, can manage to skew poll data in all kinds of ways.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m not even digging into these posted stats between you and Casey&#8230; ugh it feels like a lifetime ago already (making my head hurt).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on &#8220;Security Questions&#8221; by George Toledo</title>
		<link>http://perpendiculo.us/?p=88&#038;cpage=1#comment-93</link>
		<dc:creator>George Toledo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Dec 2008 03:27:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://perpendiculo.us/?p=88#comment-93</guid>
		<description>Nice to see you have the gene for rant as well!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nice to see you have the gene for rant as well!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Ohio Ballot by cwright</title>
		<link>http://perpendiculo.us/?p=73&#038;cpage=1#comment-79</link>
		<dc:creator>cwright</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Nov 2008 14:46:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://perpendiculo.us/?p=73#comment-79</guid>
		<description>Sorry Casey, but you&#039;re twisting the facts.  (Casey works for Cash America, by the way)

On point 6)  if 100% had steady incomes, why do we sometimes get calls for people in default from payday lenders?  Seems like 100% is rounding a bit too aggressively.

On point 5)  Irrelevant.

On point 4)  Around 66% of all Americans are home owners, and this figure hasn&#039;t been below 62% since the 1960&#039;s.  So apparently you&#039;re fleecing people who are mostly not home owners (68% are not, according to your stat).  Strangely enough, home owners, who have equity, have credit (though shaky in this economy), and thus have less frequent need of your &quot;assistance.&quot;

Point 3) Having a diploma or college experience does not imply maturity, or wise financial decision making.  Finance was not taught as part of the high school curriculum in Central Ohio during the 80&#039;s, or 90&#039;s.

Point 2) I never asserted that senior citizens were in this group.  By that time, most are retired, and can&#039;t qualify for your &quot;services&quot;.

Point 1) Median income for the US was estimated at $50,233 in 2007.  Thus, _all_ your clients are below average.  Even after taxes, the estimates are around $45k, meaning that your distribution is skewed to the below-average segment of the population.

A typical, hard-working American adult has no reason not to have savings, or some form of credit.  If they don&#039;t, they are choosing to be irresponsible.  That irresponsibility does not give you carte blanche to clean them out.

You lose.  Thanks for playing.  Try again sometime.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sorry Casey, but you&#8217;re twisting the facts.  (Casey works for Cash America, by the way)</p>
<p>On point 6)  if 100% had steady incomes, why do we sometimes get calls for people in default from payday lenders?  Seems like 100% is rounding a bit too aggressively.</p>
<p>On point 5)  Irrelevant.</p>
<p>On point 4)  Around 66% of all Americans are home owners, and this figure hasn&#8217;t been below 62% since the 1960&#8242;s.  So apparently you&#8217;re fleecing people who are mostly not home owners (68% are not, according to your stat).  Strangely enough, home owners, who have equity, have credit (though shaky in this economy), and thus have less frequent need of your &#8220;assistance.&#8221;</p>
<p>Point 3) Having a diploma or college experience does not imply maturity, or wise financial decision making.  Finance was not taught as part of the high school curriculum in Central Ohio during the 80&#8242;s, or 90&#8242;s.</p>
<p>Point 2) I never asserted that senior citizens were in this group.  By that time, most are retired, and can&#8217;t qualify for your &#8220;services&#8221;.</p>
<p>Point 1) Median income for the US was estimated at $50,233 in 2007.  Thus, _all_ your clients are below average.  Even after taxes, the estimates are around $45k, meaning that your distribution is skewed to the below-average segment of the population.</p>
<p>A typical, hard-working American adult has no reason not to have savings, or some form of credit.  If they don&#8217;t, they are choosing to be irresponsible.  That irresponsibility does not give you carte blanche to clean them out.</p>
<p>You lose.  Thanks for playing.  Try again sometime.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Ohio Ballot by Casey</title>
		<link>http://perpendiculo.us/?p=73&#038;cpage=1#comment-78</link>
		<dc:creator>Casey</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Nov 2008 14:26:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://perpendiculo.us/?p=73#comment-78</guid>
		<description>Some ACTUAL COLD HARD FACTS —
“In truth, the typical payday advance customer represents the lion’s share of America’s middle class. A typical payday loan customer is a hard working, family raising adult who does not have savings or disposable income to use as a safety net when an unexpected expense occurs.

1)The majority of payday advance customers earn between $25,000 and $50,000 annually; (hardly low income)

2)Sixty-eight percent are under 45 years old; only 4 percent are over 65, compared to 20 percent of the population; (surprise a majority are not senior citizens!!)

3)Ninety-four percent have a high school diploma or better, with 56 percent having some college or a degree; (consenting mature educated adults)

4)Forty-two percent own their own homes; 

5)The majority are married and 64 percent have children in the household; and,

6) One hundred percent (YES--100%!!!!!!!) have steady incomes and active checking accounts, both of which are required to receive a payday advance.” (Source- PD Facts)

VOTE NO on ISSUE 5</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Some ACTUAL COLD HARD FACTS —<br />
“In truth, the typical payday advance customer represents the lion’s share of America’s middle class. A typical payday loan customer is a hard working, family raising adult who does not have savings or disposable income to use as a safety net when an unexpected expense occurs.</p>
<p>1)The majority of payday advance customers earn between $25,000 and $50,000 annually; (hardly low income)</p>
<p>2)Sixty-eight percent are under 45 years old; only 4 percent are over 65, compared to 20 percent of the population; (surprise a majority are not senior citizens!!)</p>
<p>3)Ninety-four percent have a high school diploma or better, with 56 percent having some college or a degree; (consenting mature educated adults)</p>
<p>4)Forty-two percent own their own homes; </p>
<p>5)The majority are married and 64 percent have children in the household; and,</p>
<p>6) One hundred percent (YES&#8211;100%!!!!!!!) have steady incomes and active checking accounts, both of which are required to receive a payday advance.” (Source- PD Facts)</p>
<p>VOTE NO on ISSUE 5</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Ohio Ballot by Halpert</title>
		<link>http://perpendiculo.us/?p=73&#038;cpage=1#comment-75</link>
		<dc:creator>Halpert</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 02 Nov 2008 03:52:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://perpendiculo.us/?p=73#comment-75</guid>
		<description>I wholeheartedly agree with your comments about issue 5. Much of the demand for payday loans is artificial as a result of trapping borrowers in debt. In 1996, the payday lending industry got a free pass from the legislature to start charging 391% APR interest. 391% interest is no doubt predatory and unnecessary. I&#039;ll be voting yes on issue 5 to lower interest rates to 28% APR!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I wholeheartedly agree with your comments about issue 5. Much of the demand for payday loans is artificial as a result of trapping borrowers in debt. In 1996, the payday lending industry got a free pass from the legislature to start charging 391% APR interest. 391% interest is no doubt predatory and unnecessary. I&#8217;ll be voting yes on issue 5 to lower interest rates to 28% APR!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Even more ObjC-jutsu by Recent Faves Tagged With "objc" : MyNetFaves</title>
		<link>http://perpendiculo.us/?p=30&#038;cpage=1#comment-30</link>
		<dc:creator>Recent Faves Tagged With "objc" : MyNetFaves</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 21 Aug 2008 03:00:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://perpendiculo.us/?p=30#comment-30</guid>
		<description>[...] public links &gt;&gt; objc    Even more ObjC-jutsu First saved by winx0938 &#124; 3 days [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] public links &gt;&gt; objc    Even more ObjC-jutsu First saved by winx0938 | 3 days [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
