Hopefully a 100k drink combo/food hack is incoming
/h/the_boglim
Bananamine
jngl/beat
Hate to live. Don't live to hate.
9mo ago
(image post)
91 thread views
#264716
That's what's fricking up toobz. Frick the trollz, peace to everyone else
- 3
- 9
Now playing: Bad Boss Boogie (DKC).mp3
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
LET'S FRICKIN GOOOOO SILVER
PLAY BUTTON 
BURRITO 
COOKING 
PAN HACK SOON
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
He's got no excuses to not throw a one man rager, he's evicted anyhow
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
One common response when it's pointed out that you can't always tell is “well we can tell 99% of the time”, or some other high percentage pulled out of nowhere. This is a clear overestimate of how often someone can tell, but let's charitably assume that that number is true for a moment and do some maths. If you could tell who was trans or not 99% of the time, that would still lead to nearly two thirds of the people you read as trans actually being cis.
The mathematics is clear, using Bayes theorem.
Even if we very charitably assume that the sensitivity and specificity of "we can always tell" in detecting a trans person is both 98% then they are still wrong 50% of the time and accuse a cis person of being trans.
This is because there are vastly more cisgender than transgender people.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context