Comments for models for life http://models4life.wordpress.com A blog about forecasting sports, politics, climate, and whatever... Mon, 06 Apr 2009 14:44:08 +0000 http://wordpress.com/ hourly 1 Comment on Baseball Models I – PECOTA by Sawyer http://models4life.wordpress.com/2008/08/22/baseball-models-i-pecota/#comment-23 Sawyer Mon, 06 Apr 2009 14:44:08 +0000 http://models4life.wordpress.com/?p=16#comment-23 Note, The Mars Pioneers did finish strong in 2008 and did secure a playoff spot but were beaten in the first round. Note, The Mars Pioneers did finish strong in 2008 and did secure a playoff spot but were beaten in the first round.

]]> Comment on My final election projection by brandon Goldman http://models4life.wordpress.com/2008/11/04/my-final-election-projection/#comment-21 brandon Goldman Tue, 04 Nov 2008 23:50:31 +0000 http://models4life.wordpress.com/?p=46#comment-21 Shawn, Great commentary, very interesting and well thought out. I still can't believe that Obama is going to win Indiana. 393 is crazy, but it is very possible. bg Shawn,

Great commentary, very interesting and well thought out. I still can’t believe that Obama is going to win Indiana.

393 is crazy, but it is very possible.

bg

]]> Comment on The 10th Inning (Baseball as a Model for Life) by shawndgoldman http://models4life.wordpress.com/2008/10/13/the-10th-inning-baseball-as-a-model-for-life/#comment-20 shawndgoldman Wed, 15 Oct 2008 02:54:09 +0000 http://models4life.wordpress.com/?p=31#comment-20 I think if you did a simple analysis, you'd find baseball profited more as a result of steroids than they were harmed by the ill press they received from them. Baseball set attendance and ratings records during the home run chases of the early 2000's, and the game has continued to grow since rampant steroid use was uncovered. Doubtless, part of this was due to their success at making scapegoats out of a few of the most successful steroid users such as Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens. But I don't think anyone in baseball would go back and do it all the same if they had a chance to change things. There is a value places on the innocence of the game that was damaged here, and I'd guess that is worth more than the extra profits from the Steroid Era... even to baseball executives. I think if you did a simple analysis, you’d find baseball profited more as a result of steroids than they were harmed by the ill press they received from them. Baseball set attendance and ratings records during the home run chases of the early 2000’s, and the game has continued to grow since rampant steroid use was uncovered. Doubtless, part of this was due to their success at making scapegoats out of a few of the most successful steroid users such as Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens.

But I don’t think anyone in baseball would go back and do it all the same if they had a chance to change things. There is a value places on the innocence of the game that was damaged here, and I’d guess that is worth more than the extra profits from the Steroid Era… even to baseball executives.

]]> Comment on The 10th Inning (Baseball as a Model for Life) by Jacob http://models4life.wordpress.com/2008/10/13/the-10th-inning-baseball-as-a-model-for-life/#comment-19 Jacob Tue, 14 Oct 2008 19:57:51 +0000 http://models4life.wordpress.com/?p=31#comment-19 I wonder if the use (and consequences) of steroids could be justified via economic discounting arguments. The benefits to MLB of enhanced player performance (ticket sales, merchandise, etc.) could make the use of steroids a risk worth the payoff. As in the case of discounting applied to climate change, the ethical issue then begs the question of assessing value beyond economic success. I wonder if the use (and consequences) of steroids could be justified via economic discounting arguments. The benefits to MLB of enhanced player performance (ticket sales, merchandise, etc.) could make the use of steroids a risk worth the payoff.

As in the case of discounting applied to climate change, the ethical issue then begs the question of assessing value beyond economic success.

]]> Comment on Hello world! by Hello world! « Colin’s Weblog http://models4life.wordpress.com/2008/02/04/hello-world/#comment-15 Hello world! « Colin’s Weblog Sun, 17 Aug 2008 21:32:11 +0000 #comment-15 [...] should one right in a first post? The award for the most geeky must go to my collegue Shawn. I wouldn’t do something like that, honest. So instead, here is my most exciting discovery of [...] [...] should one right in a first post? The award for the most geeky must go to my collegue Shawn. I wouldn’t do something like that, honest. So instead, here is my most exciting discovery of [...]

]]> Comment on A new and improved model for the Ohio primary by Tanyatt http://models4life.wordpress.com/2008/02/28/a-model-for-the-ohio-primary/#comment-13 Tanyatt Mon, 24 Mar 2008 17:41:02 +0000 http://models4life.wordpress.com/?p=6#comment-13 thats it, bro thats it, bro

]]> Comment on Context for the 2008 primaries: a changing political landscape by shawndgoldman http://models4life.wordpress.com/2008/02/04/context-for-the-2008-primaries-a-changing-political-landscape/#comment-10 shawndgoldman Thu, 28 Feb 2008 16:32:08 +0000 http://models4life.wordpress.com/?p=3#comment-10 And here's one question for self-defined conservatives that is really driving the coalition apart: What is the role of the United States in the world? Many conservatives (including G.W. Bush back in 2000) argue that we shouldn't be the "world's police," and that we should only limit our involvement overseas. Others (including G.W. Bush since 9/11) argue we have to have an aggressive foreign policy that actively promotes democracy throughout the world. They are two very different positions, and many conservatives are truly conflicted about it, as one could make an excellent argument as to either one being the true "conservative approach." I think the movement as a whole is, as well, and that's a big part of why the movement is showing cracks right now. There are lots of "conservatives" that cannot stand the Iraq war. OK, I've got to get back to work... And here’s one question for self-defined conservatives that is really driving the coalition apart:

What is the role of the United States in the world?

Many conservatives (including G.W. Bush back in 2000) argue that we shouldn’t be the “world’s police,” and that we should only limit our involvement overseas. Others (including G.W. Bush since 9/11) argue we have to have an aggressive foreign policy that actively promotes democracy throughout the world.

They are two very different positions, and many conservatives are truly conflicted about it, as one could make an excellent argument as to either one being the true “conservative approach.” I think the movement as a whole is, as well, and that’s a big part of why the movement is showing cracks right now. There are lots of “conservatives” that cannot stand the Iraq war.

OK, I’ve got to get back to work…

]]> Comment on Context for the 2008 primaries: a changing political landscape by shawndgoldman http://models4life.wordpress.com/2008/02/04/context-for-the-2008-primaries-a-changing-political-landscape/#comment-9 shawndgoldman Thu, 28 Feb 2008 16:26:32 +0000 http://models4life.wordpress.com/?p=3#comment-9 Hrm... how to define a "conservative." That's a tough one, especially given the negative sentiments towards the far-right wing of the country at the moment. I think the point I'm trying to make is that the tag conservatives includes much more than bigoted, wealthy, power-hungry, corrupt, war-mongers. That's a "liberal's" characterization of that group. But that ignores the fact that many in the "conservative" movement only shared values with one or two of the sub-groups within the movement. I guess the point I was trying to make about conservatives is exactly that: there are (or at least were) many different kinds of conservatives. I think the problem with the conservative movement is its most radical members (G.W. Bush et al.) have taken control of the movement, and that's both breaking the coalition and the strength of the coalition. So, yes, right now, the movement is defined by its worst aspects, but that has more to do with who is leading the group than it has to do with who has been a part of it over the last 30 years. Hrm… how to define a “conservative.” That’s a tough one, especially given the negative sentiments towards the far-right wing of the country at the moment. I think the point I’m trying to make is that the tag conservatives includes much more than bigoted, wealthy, power-hungry, corrupt, war-mongers. That’s a “liberal’s” characterization of that group. But that ignores the fact that many in the “conservative” movement only shared values with one or two of the sub-groups within the movement. I guess the point I was trying to make about conservatives is exactly that: there are (or at least were) many different kinds of conservatives. I think the problem with the conservative movement is its most radical members (G.W. Bush et al.) have taken control of the movement, and that’s both breaking the coalition and the strength of the coalition. So, yes, right now, the movement is defined by its worst aspects, but that has more to do with who is leading the group than it has to do with who has been a part of it over the last 30 years.

]]> Comment on Context for the 2008 primaries: a changing political landscape by shawndgoldman http://models4life.wordpress.com/2008/02/04/context-for-the-2008-primaries-a-changing-political-landscape/#comment-8 shawndgoldman Thu, 28 Feb 2008 16:19:11 +0000 http://models4life.wordpress.com/?p=3#comment-8 Oh, and as the the "most Americans... were harmed by these policies." That's just my bias sneaking in. But you knew that much, right? ;-) Oh, and as the the “most Americans… were harmed by these policies.” That’s just my bias sneaking in. But you knew that much, right? ;-)

]]> Comment on Context for the 2008 primaries: a changing political landscape by shawndgoldman http://models4life.wordpress.com/2008/02/04/context-for-the-2008-primaries-a-changing-political-landscape/#comment-7 shawndgoldman Thu, 28 Feb 2008 16:17:40 +0000 http://models4life.wordpress.com/?p=3#comment-7 Well, I didn't mean to come off as strongly against conservatives as I did. If it makes you feel any better, I think Obama is doing basically the same thing right now that Reagan was doing in the 80's. Its not as much about "duping" people as it is about being a great statesman. Reagan was a tremendous leader because in a nation bitterly divided by politics, his rhetoric allowed him to break through partisan barriers to make people agree with the values he had. That's what a great statesman does. I think Obama is doing the same thing. Instead of "triangulating" with policies, and attempting to move one's platform to the middle of the road, these two men have moved the middle of the road towards their side of the debate. And that's something that is truly amazing. So, you can look at it as "duping" people. I tend to view it as "statesmanship." Well, I didn’t mean to come off as strongly against conservatives as I did. If it makes you feel any better, I think Obama is doing basically the same thing right now that Reagan was doing in the 80’s. Its not as much about “duping” people as it is about being a great statesman. Reagan was a tremendous leader because in a nation bitterly divided by politics, his rhetoric allowed him to break through partisan barriers to make people agree with the values he had. That’s what a great statesman does. I think Obama is doing the same thing. Instead of “triangulating” with policies, and attempting to move one’s platform to the middle of the road, these two men have moved the middle of the road towards their side of the debate. And that’s something that is truly amazing. So, you can look at it as “duping” people. I tend to view it as “statesmanship.”

]]>