Sure the incel trolls are ridiculous, but

I'm actually curious as to what side you think argues with evidence.

Which do you think I mean?

I'm going with left because of your spacing.

He's probably talking about the SJW-Right, they love bullshit graphs and citations from Far Right tabloids and discredited scientific studies.

>infographs
lol. 13% and 50%, am I right?

I think he's Alt-Left, whatever that is

Do you think that statistic or wrong or something?

If she and the movie are so great, why does she need so many media crutches? Legitimately curious.

Do you know how to read statistics, or simply look as numbers as if they're evidence by themselves?

I appreciate your absolute refusal to just answer my question.

It's not so great, haven't you read the reviews?
Pretty much all the only ones calling it great come from fanboy sites. Most reviews go from passable to not good enough.
Just another mediocre Marvel movie, only now critics seem to be slowly waking up from the Marvel daze. Hopefully, after Endgame critics will start giving proper reviews instead of making excuses for the movies.

My point is that the statistic on itself doesn't mean anything, yet people keep repeating it as if it did. Statistics only work when you understand and take in account all the variables involved. The fact that you think that the mere number is proof of anything shows how little understanding of proper scientific investigation you have.

That's a lot of weasel words to say "don't judge every black person as a criminal even if statistics demonstrate they commit the most violent crime."

Wow, I think I found the reddit equivalent of "Just say you hate black people and go"

Elucidate me, user, what are the variables involved?

>these numbers are based on empirical data
>>yeah, but the numbers themselves aren't proof! Checkmate, racists!
Stop being dumb, user. Even if the statement isn't exactingly precise in statistical terminology, it highlights the major point: crime isn't independent of race.

>reddit equivalent of a sentence popularized on reddit

Attached: redditor.png (764x279, 6K)

Twain was writing in a time before journalistic ethics. Now, obviously there's a lot of shit journalism out there, but...comparing clickbaiters to news organizations is almost always going to be a false equivalence.

Its reasonably great, I just saw it 2 hours ago.
IMPO its definitely worth going to see.
Or don't. The obsession with posting all night about how awful it is without having seen it is pretty odd tho.

Attached: 1433250343796.jpg (194x273, 26K)

>he thinks national news corporations have journalistic ethics
Lmao

I mean, news organizations being left of conspiracy theorist nobodies on YouTube is hardly evidence of widespread bias on YouTube's part, except bias against reputable media producers.

Not him, but rates of prosecution are a HUGE factor.
I've had white friend of mine have brawls broken up or gotten caught with (a considerable amount of) weed that is pretty much automatic negro jailtime and prosecution. And they didn't even get cuffed, let alone hauled off.

I haven't seen it and don't plan to see it. I'm just waiting to shitpost, if it doesn't reach the projections I have posts ready and if it does I have posts ready.

Again, you don't understand how statistics work. Those numbers are simply gathered data. The next step is to analyze the data to try to extract some actual knowledge and understanding from it.
Observation is merely the first step of scientific knowledge. You're only interested in tautologies that support a worldview you have already made up in your mind.

For, not against. Derp.

Thanks totally unique and grassroots anonymous commentator. I will be sure to watch a camrip of Captain Marvel™, for free, before posting further.

Attached: SOY.jpg (416x443, 135K)

>anecdotal
>evidence
We're talking statistics, user.

If you put in "Captain Marvel is" into the search about half the autocompletes are "bad, trash, SJW"

Yeah great point. What does this gathered data suggest to you upon analysis?

Attached: blacks vs cops.jpg (1024x479, 75K)

See, there's a fair argument, but that's not supported by facts as of yet. Now we have to look at rates of violent crime among races to discuss further.

Meanwhile, you're a pseudo-intellectual faggot.

I bet you really believe it matters to me one way or the other. Enjoy the camrip.
As much as I appreciate honesty, I assumed that was the case. In a week or so when more of Yea Forums has seen it, it will be possible to discuss it and I'll just politely ignore your posts. Carry on.

>huh, wow, 50% of all convicted violent criminals are black
>not even just criminals, but specifically violent criminals
>despite the initial assumption that only 13% of all violent criminals would be black, if race is independent of crime
>>REEEEE YOU JUST DONT UNDERSTAND STATISTICS

The numbers themselves are data, not proof. You understand those aren't the same thing, do you?

I don't know because I haven't studied the subject, I only understand how statistics work and what are they useful for. One thing that I would look into, is how many of that 13% live in poverty, for instance.

Many news sources publish their ethical statements, but, sure, plenty are absolute trash. But it's not like nobody, "peoples" journalism is exactly ethical.

>>YouTube lets relevant searches go up and clickbaiting go down
>If only they can do that with everything.

I too like my corporate brainwashing

How come "incel" isn't filtered to "chad" yet?

Attached: thinking.png (680x680, 59K)

Doesn't this sorta fuck up Dolan's argument about the Wall being an emergency need to stop violent crime?

Then can you answer my question?

I'm not the guy you were responding to, all I know is capeshit will never be discussed fairly on Yea Forums and I like that.

What the fuck does poverty have to do with anything? Violent crime is violent crime. If we're going that route, violent crime in white trailer trash neighborhoods are much lower than in ghettos.

t. Clickbaiting outragefarming alt-right youtuber

>The numbers themselves are data, not proof. You understand those aren't the same thing, do you?

Yeah, and the data supports the conclusion that urban youth are violent. You don't get to throw away data because it contradicts with YOUR biases.

>I only understand how statistics work
NO you dont; I guaran-fucking-tee that the extent of you statistical education is highschool AP stats.

I'm not terribly familiar with these "media crutches" as you put it. I pretty much go to see every superhero movie, I am fond of the genre.
I decided to see this back when it was announced, I generally don't browse Youtube for opinions. Most internet opinions are awful shit from attention-hungry faggots.

Things this data doesn't show: who fired first, whether being fired upon increases the likelihood that one will fire back, or a comparison of demographic data and police incidences. And I don't mean to argue anything other than these two pie charts don't offer a complete picture of reality, and suggesting it does is either idiocy or intellectual dishonesty.

Empiricism ain't that hard, but it takes honest work.

>Corporations use their power to try and boost their sales by expunging dissatisfied views from search engines
>Clearly the leftists are behind this!

You are going to tell me next that Tumblr purge had been orchestrated by SJWs and LGBT, aren't you?

Attached: DXMFqPYVAAAoPOe.jpg (567x567, 55K)

t. believes CNN

Theres still a whole other 50% of violent crime to worry about, and we just can't ship the negros back to Africa, so we have to deal with the next most pressing issue.
Brown People.

It's their platform and they owe you absolute dick. Be a good little researcher and account for bias in your sources.

>The numbers themselves are data, not proof

Is that what they teach in schools now? Read this over 100 times until you realize why it's a retarded statement.

Attached: hahahaha.jpg (1085x1217, 137K)

If Youtube is a leftist tool, why don't the right start their own video uploading website?

It's not like Trump is even pushing the validity of that argument. Everyone knows it's bunk.

If you honestly think that because black people are 13% of the American population, that should mean that black people should be 13% of everything, you're dumber than I thought.
Again, you should try to understand how statistics work. The valuable skills in that field aren't data gathering, anyone can do that. What's valuable is the interpretation and understanding of the data gathered. That's what statistic experts do.

>it's their platform
So I DONT have to bake the cake?

CNN carries news along with (easily ignorable) opinion. Just turn it off when a Roundtable forms.
Youtube is never good for news or credible reporting of anything.

>but-but-but surely the black guy had a GOOD REASON to shoot at cops

>data shows all of those things via the government URL at the bottom

Fair enough

You are aware the cake people won that court case, yes?

this says nothing about the circumstances of why the police were fired upon. another easy takeaway from this graph is that white people are bootlicking statists too pussy to hate cops but what else is new

t. Believes his own made-up fantasies, seeks an echo-chamber of likeminded nutjobs and disregards anyone that disagrees with his baseless opinions and made-up facts as "one of (((them)))"

Yeah, the statement was a poor expression of that idea that straight data doesn't do much without thoughtful analysis. Even the most stringent empiricist should recognize the necessity of narrative in presenting their data. Those students who don't...well, they get to be lab monkeys for the real scientists.

Are you seriously asking what does poverty have to do with violent crime? And as I mentioned, it's one variable I would take in account. There are plenty of others.
Statistics are simply observation. Observation is not proof. That's not how the scientific method works. It's usually the starting point of an investigation and not the ending.

Thank you Jews, very cool!

I don't know how controlled speech platforms jive with refusing services to a class of people, but, as another poster said, the bakers won that case, so I can only assume the two situations aren't comparable.

And what are your conclusions, based on the data? Stop mouthing off like a faggot, this isn't the hard sciences.

>If you honestly think that because black people are 13% of the American population, that should mean that black people should be 13% of everything, you're dumber than I thought.
What are you, a fucking racist? They're just like us, and any data that suggests that race ISNT independent of other factors is racist too.

>you don't understand statistics
Senpai, I'm litterally a stats major. The only person here who doesn't know what they're talking about is you.
Your rejection of the data is layered upon by countless personal biases and prejudices; you're not smart, you're not educated, you're just desperately trying to ignore inconvenient conclusions while looking for faces in the proverbial clouds.

I mean, because of this I have sat through some pretty awful superhero shit, but I'm happy Captain Marvel wasn't one of those.
It's not my favorite Superhero movie, or MCU movie, but I found it pretty enjoyable overall.
The only bit that autistically bugged the shit out of me is the scene in the bar where amnesiac Carol is asking Nick "questions a Skrull wouldn't know the answer too, they are too far back".

How in the fuck would she know the correct answers to "what was his favorite pet's name?", she didn't even know the guy's full name.
Really awkwardly written scene but easy to get over.

>Clickbait is the voice of the people!!!!
All information sources need curation precisely to keep the garbage out.

I will answer that question with an example.

>all internet porn "tube" sites are largely owned by the same group: porn studios
>Motherless (porn site) blows up in popularity due to it being a popular, easy, fast option for amateurs to share
>starts to approach Pornhub, Redtube, etc. in visitors
>suddenly Motherless gets flooded with CP
>not brand new CP (as a website popular with amateur might imply) but old as shit 280p videos
>despite deleting these videos, staff of Motherless receive a visit from the feds
>"Make your site impossible to upload CP onto or we will arrest you for 9000 counts of child abuse"
>slaps the shit out of Motherless site heads with fines
>site heads panic because they can't pay and making a CP filter is basically impossible
>porn studios appear
>"We will pay off your fines, and give you this pittance, if you hand over total control and all rights of your site to us"
>deal is made
>suddenly CP is never uploaded to Motherless ever again
>joins the conglomerate of tube sites owned by porn studios

The moment any serious competition appears, existing entities will use their massive coffers of money to completely shit all over it until the competition can be bought out or, if they're stubborn, crushed by the legal system.

Yes, and if I'm not allowed to be angry about youtube being a leftist hive of scum and villainy, you're not allowed to be made about denying service.

>I don't see how apples compare to apples
Smoothbrain

>comparing clickbaiters to news organizations
KEK
Pew News is the most reliable news source. That's how bad things have gotten. Fake news is rampant, people unironically listen to BUZZFEED, they always report on an incident and make political commentary before doing any research and then quietly retract it and hope nobody sees the retraction, and finally they always push their agenda no matter what. The mainstream media is the WORST way to get information.

Oh no, there's not a good reason to shoot at the police no matter your color. I was merely suggesting one of the answers to the question "Why do black people shoot at the cops more than other races?" is "The cops should at black people more." Now, is that a viable answer? Probably not, but the data at hand doesn't address that question at all.

Fair enough. I don't have a horse in this race; I was just pointing out a few limitations of that data set.

This. I don't want to look shit up on the internet and get "whatever is trending on Yea Forums" as the answer. I shitpost here as badly as anyone.

Shut up fake news. Nobody believes your lies.

Attached: 1520990578673.gif (480x287, 1.21M)

In what way are any of those being promoted leftist videos? Fuck this entire thread.

>I'm litterally a stats major.
You should know that claiming this is only going to be met with denial and derision. Never mind the fact that being a stats major doesn't mean you've yet (or ever will) learn what to do with the numbers once you've collected them. It's just not a good way to build authority with your audience.

I never said I was an expert in statistics, I simply said I understand how they work. It's data gathering, which is one of the initial stages of an investigation. The processing of that data is where the knowledge comes from.
I never said you have to throw away the data, just that you have to understand it instead of simply gathering it. The question would be "why is it that if they're 13% of the population, they commit 50% of violent crimes?" and a proper investigation of all the variables should take place instead of simply saying "because they're black". That is no explanation of anything, it's a tautology, circular thinking.

>Posts examples of how monopolies are prone to killing rising competition through even those backdoors that are illegal
>This somehow proves that progressives are killing the internet

Attached: at1expozqp201.jpg (500x708, 54K)

>Twain was writing in a time before journalistic ethics.
twain was writing at a time when the two biggest newspapers in America tricked people into going to war with spain for funsies

>sponsored news
>relevant searches

your programming is going well.

If I browse the internet (especially /pol/) I get news before it hits any televised news outlets, AND I get to see the raw video of whatever's going on (rather than whatever the news station edits to fit the coverage narrative.)

See: le drummer native vs. MAGA kids, that faggot shot over a dumpster mattress, etc.

Attached: 1547076261217.png (874x440, 449K)

>all internet porn "tube" sites are largely owned by the same group: porn studios
This is not true. Starting with Pornhub, most of the "free" porn sites were initially owned by tech savvy people and firms that had learned how to, essentially, steal from the porn studios. These tech companies have probably bought studios to go more legit, but the initial sea change only did damage to the traditional industry.

You're allowed to be angry as hell about Youtube.
You're just silly for wanting Big Government to step in to muscle Youtube.
Be my guest; be upset. Just realize that Youtube is acting well within its rights. It isn't even being as restrictive as it could be.

>news organizations
>not clickbaiters

Attached: FakeNews - Weather 01.jpg (1064x812, 133K)

>"why dont those nazis just make their own youtube???"
Because the moment any serious competition appears, existing entities will use their massive coffers of money to completely shit all over it until the competition can be bought out or, if they're stubborn, crushed by the legal system.
>"wtf irrelevant??? literally??"

Attached: 1547174107237.png (246x310, 112K)

>Many tube sites are owned by multi-billion-dollar corporation MindGeek (Formerly Manwin), which also owns Brazzers, Digital Playground, Reality Kings, Mofos, Twistys, and parts of Playboy and Wicked Pictures. The tube sites MindGeek owns include YouPorn, Pornhub, Tube8, XTube, and ExtremeTube.

This.

And these are probably the same people who dislike Disney/Pixar for lording over the smaller, independent animation studios during awards season. The same people who admonish the "big two" Marvel/DC duopoly for crashing independent publishers/creators.

>statistical okay education is just learning how to collect numbers like a glorified surveyor
Okay, user, you're clearly an educated individual on the matter. I'm sorry for doubting you :^)

Except "because they're black" isn't a tautology; it may not be the entirely correct answer, but it's not a tautology.
It's be a tautology if I said "blacks commit more crime because blacks committ more crime"
"Blacks commit more crime because they're black" comes with the implication that there are qualities associated with being black that result in increased crime.

Don't bother. Alt-right blowhards will continue to hold your words to an air-tight scrutiny while simultaneously expecting you to treat their ramblings on par with scientific method.

Attached: Poltard_assembly_line.jpg (1890x1630, 153K)

>apples compare to apples
A private company with no obligation to offer free speech protections to its users versus a private company with government protections on its right to express the religious rights of its owners.

Yes, I'm the one with no wrinkles on my brain.

Credit card companies are owned by leftist Jews and will refuse to process your payment if you try to make that. I dare you to try.

Attached: Build your own.png (768x768, 130K)

I'm not rejecting the data, I never said that it wasn't true. I'm just saying that to be properly understood, you need to study all the variables that are involved. If you're really a stats major, you should know that. You know very well that gathering data is only the first step, and that the true value of statistics comes from the processing of it.

Did a /pol/ack call you mean words, canuck?

Any video that doesn't affirm the inferiority of women, blacks, jews, etc. while also affirming the ascendancy of President Trump is leftist propaganda.

Attached: Untitled.png (838x851, 167K)

who names a kid after mould coated cheese?

>"Blacks commit more crime because they're black" comes with the implication that there are qualities associated with being black that result in increased crime.
And those implications are based on the 13/50 statistic. It leads nowhere.

If a platform is sufficiently populated it can be deemed a public space and thus beholden to federal free speech laws

See: Facebook

>The same people who admonish the "big two" Marvel/DC duopoly for crashing independent publishers/creators.
It's fanboys who make Batman comics dominant, it isn't some evil corporate conspiracy.
There are a shit-ton of indy comics out there. More so than at any time I can remember.
Anyone who gets upset at the fucking Oscar Academy should neck themselves for caring about the fucking Oscar Academy in the first place.

Attached: Barracuda.jpg (243x207, 9K)

And that's exactly why you're being disingenuous; the processing for that data has already been done, and it's baked into the "13 50" meme. Not even the most diehard polfag would refuse to account for poverty and such which theryll then argue is a result of them being black, too

Blacks commit more crime due to: genetics, violent nature, culture, single mothers, etc. In THEORY blacks could be tamed, but there needs to be a complete overhaul.

Except it's not; the straw Man you've constructed might, though.

Black poverty is caused by lack of foresight, short term always being favored over long term, their own inherent laziness, egoism, and irrational hubris. All of this is amplified by black culture.

While there is a degree of responsibility of the reader's conformism, you can't deny that even to this day, the big two's bussiness practices are extremely unfair towards smaller publishers. They're still holding the comic book industry hostage through their shitty distribution system.

>Credit card companies are owned by leftist Jews

And yet alt-right continues to cry about George Soros and George Soros alone, because this was the only wealthy jew that filled the bill of a jewish civilization-wrecker with limitless coffers.

All while most jewish financial overlords are more interested in pushing for war against Iran than caring about progressives and their grievances.

Attached: 44683146_1992949437432023_9064102713804980224_o.jpg (1800x1313, 484K)

Oh no, the intended learning outcomes for a stats major include thoughtful analysis of the data. I'm saying that being a stats major, in itself, doesn't bestow these learning outcomes on you. You still have to prove you know what you're talking about. At best you'll be able to get away with saying you've done stats work at reputable companies after five or so years in your career.

See, I'm not critiquing what an education in statistics can give you. I'm critiquing your use of a major in progress as your sole rhetorical strategy. Here, you probably still remember your core writing courses. Give me some logos with your tepid ethos, and your expertise won't be in question.

>a private corporation with no requirement to honor a right vs a private corporation with no requirement to honor a right
Literally smoothbrained.

>Facebook is a public space beholden to Free Speech laws
[Citation Needed]

Attached: Alita.jpg (394x508, 33K)

What is white poverty caused by?

>And those implications are based on the 13/50 statistic

Among other data

Attached: blacks and violent DNA.jpg (1136x2200, 812K)

It SHOULD be, it isn't.

>And yet alt-right continues to cry about George Soros and George Soros alone
Wouldn't that be the "alt lite" because they're too scared to delve into the JQ? They laser focus on Soros because then they can say "no we only hate him see we're not antisemitic!"

No such determination has been made. Facebook can and does censor whatever it wants. However, until such a time as I can follow up on whatever legal precedents I would need to read to check your work, I'll take your word on the general idea.

>The complete collapse of manufacturing jobs
and
>Increased immigration (legal or illegal) where it's literally impossible to compete with dirt-cheap wages
and
>Inflation

Almost none of this applies to blacks because they haven't had high employment rates since the days of slavery.

The alt-right doesn’t like Trump anymore.

There's no reason it should be.

Pretty sure 400 some years of being unable to own property may have played some role.

>sole rhetorical strategy
It ain't though, fampai. You should know full well that me even saying that was knowingly pointless (this is Yea Forums, were all anonymous, etc etc) and not a genuine attempt at garnering credibility.
Rather, it was a slightly subtle insult meant to imply "you have no fucking clue what you're talking about and i think so little of your arguments that im just going to drop an unverifiable authority bomb"

theregister.co.uk/2019/01/07/facebook_public_officials_first_amendment_appeal/

>The Fourth Circuit of Virginia and the Carolinas ruled [PDF] that the Facebook page of a public official – in this case the chair of Loudoun County Board of Supervisors, Phyllis Randall – "bear the hallmarks of a public forum" and as a result her decision to ban Virginia resident Brian Davison after he made critical comments about members of the board was illegal.

>The decision does not make all of Facebook, or social media, a public forum. The appeals court dug into the specifics: it was a Facebook "page" rather than a personal profile and Randall had repeatedly characterized it as her "county Facebook page." She also served as an admin for the page in her position as a "government official."

Floodgates are open and there is ample precedent to make Facebook (and similar sites) beholden to more public square laws.

>they haven't had high employment rates since the days of slavery.
It's almost as if they were discriminated against in hiring, admissions, loans, ect.

I'll give ya one more. We're comparing the obligations a private company has to its users against the obligations the federal government has to a private company.

You act like white people are all old money, user.