437 karma · joined June 22, 2016
there are now "warm up" books (alcock) as well as even more basic real analysis books (abbott, about half the length of spivak).
submariners used to call SSN 685 "lipscomb fish"...glenard p. lipscomb had nothing to do with the navy and did nothing but die as a congressman the year the ship was being named.
uss jimmy carter? the ex-secretary club (forrestal, john warner, thomas s. gates)?
(2) there are no documentary sources cited for the article's claims. (the guy who wrote this writes whole books explicitly relying on unverifiable primary sources as well: https://www.amazon.com/dp/1841767875) i don't have any particular reason to disbelieve it but i also don't understand the claim that an f1 with a refueling probe and two hardpoints could not possibly have carried two exocets.
(3) the cyrano/exocet combination fingerprinted the iraqi air force even if they hadn't quickly copped to the attack. even if true, knowing this "secret" doesn't change anything.
there is a marina in redwood city, but notice how shallow the bay is south of SFO (aside from the channel) - much of that is mudflats (lakes don't have tides), marine preserves, etc.
the parent referred to bias. the example you're giving is one where the sample is biased because of a poor choice of sampling method. so, i think you're actually agreeing with the parent (as well as danah).