Follower Analysis…and Some Hotdogs

I wish to talk today about a milestone. My first ENTRY in this blog was July 1st, twenty ought oh nine. On the 30th day of May, twenty ought eighteen, I got my 100th follower. I thought it might be time for some “analytics” as the captains of e-commerce like to say (to me, they’ll always be “statistics”).

The numbers below that you will contemplate shortly after I finish this statement, are a data hotdog – it’s comprised of this and that to form a deliciously fulfilling tube of meaning. The “parts” I’ve so revivified include – time, number of posts and number of followers. Each factor represents an obscure part of an animal that can’t survive cuisinically (why not?) by itself. Like a butcher of information, I will grind these ingredients together, and produce…

Listen, I like this analogy, but I’m ready to get on with the data processing. To that end –

VARIABLE #1 – TIME:
It’s been 8.8 years, or 465 weeks, or 3,255 days, or 78,120 hours since July 1st, 2009. One or all may be used to represent time in my calculations. Therefore, I’ve decided to call any variable dealing with time, “TIME”.

VARIABLE #2 – LABOR:

You are reading my 200th published entry. That is, it wasn’t published at the time of the 100th follower. Therefore, I put in 199 posts worth of toil. Moreover, I estimate my total word count to be in the neighborhood of 85,291, by adding the word counts of every 19th -20th post and averaging it. That average came out to 428.6 words per post.

VARIABLE #3 – FOLLOWERS:
I have 100 loyal readers. That can be construed in many ways – such as 200 pinky toes connected to 100 brains that enjoy stimulating content. Or 93 or so appendices occupying space inside 93 or so of my readers. This assumes that my followers are consistent with the statistic mentioned HERE reporting that 7 percent of the population experiences an appendicitis at some point.

I feel like I’m flagrantly digressing. Getting back to the point – as a function of TIME (t), FOLLOWERS (f) increases at a rate of about 3.1% of a new follower everyday or a new follower every 32 or 33 days. I think of it like earning followers piece by piece, by this time tomorrow I will have earned a foot or perhaps a hand and forearm of some lucky reader.

As a function of LABOR (l), I gain one follower for every 1.99 posts. At a fitting rate of 199/3255 (I move so very slowly) – one post every 16 days.

Using my word count estimate of 85,291 – that’s 100/85,291 or .12% (.1172%) of a follower for every word, or one follower for every 852.91 words.

Application: up to and including HERE, there are 466 words or about 466 x 0.1172% = 0.546152 (55%) of one new follower. In more practical terms, I only need to write ~387 more words or work 83% as hard to gain a complete follower. At my current rate, such a task would take 85,291 words/3,255 days = 26.2 words/day. Three-hundred-eighty-seven (I can’t start a sentence with a number, so unsightly) more words divided by 26.2 words/day = 14.77 days. Thing is, I’ve written 77 more words already and I’m not done, so this post might earn me 1.4 or even (dare I say it?) 1.75 more followers!

In short, (f)=0.001172l, where l=t/0.038163. Thus, assuming everything remains constant, a period of say, 214 days (π x 100) would result in 214 days/0. 038163 = 5,607.526 words, netting me 0.001172 x 5,607.526 = 6 full bodied followers, the torso and part of the hips from another (6.57).

Inferences: like any blogger, one of my goals is to reach as many whole people as possible. Based on the numbers, reaching my next milestone – 1,000 followers, gaining 900 more – would take 29,306.058 days. If there is no change in the time I commit to blogging, that will take about 80 years (29,306.058 days)/ 0. 038163 or 767,918.45 words. In 80 years, I’ll be 117 years old. I’m not going to bet on living that long – I don’t think blogging would be high on my priority list anyway.

Listen, I transposed the 5s and 2 in the number of days figure (3,255 became 3,522). I’ve just spent an afternoon not only correcting those figures but editing the portion above “Application: up to and including HERE, there are 466 words…” so it stayed at 466 words, lest I recalculate the figures. That said, I don’t want to fade this post out gracefully; I’m hungry, I’m just abruptly halting now to go eat…a hotdog sounds good.

—–

One more thing. there are 779 words above the line, this post should snag me 779 x .001172 = .913 or 91% of a new follower. Assuming this individual is a female of average weight (168.5lbs), that’s 153.335lbs of follower. For the average dude, weighing in at 195.7lbs on average, that’s 178.07lbs of flesh that will soon receive an email every time a spin a yarn.

In closing, I’d just like to point out that the numbers listed above, notably the near 800,000 words and ~30,000 days, as big and unwieldy as they seem, are perfectly rational to me. If you’re like me, you feel belittled when some fatcat starts spouting off about Apple being worth 40 kajillion dollars or that Trump paid $17 million for this or that trivial thing. When used in this way, numbers are meaningless – merely a device for the bourgeoisie to show the proletariat how high they can count. I don’t see the numbers in this post as numbers, but as little pebbles I can collect to someday make a mountain of meaning. Won’t you be one of my pebbles?

Webp.net-gifmaker

FIN

@JarrettLWilson

Mass Shooter Profiles

As reported LAST WEEK, I’ve started to compile a database of mass shooter profiles.

I didn’t get near as much done as I would’ve liked. All the same, I’m going to publish my labors up to now.

I haven’t collected all the data that I’d like to and, as a result, I haven’t started running basic statistics (frequency tables, etc.) But, there are a few curious trends I’m picking up on.

Firstly, I’m using the top 20 shootings listed HERE as a starting point. Wikipedia has a similar page, but every fact is linked to a more credible reference. During my initial sweep, I didn’t take note of how many guns the shooter had or the category of the weapon(s). I will continue to add –

  1. Gun data
  2. More specific notes about the shooter – including analyzing background. The words “autism”, “Asperger’s”, “loner” and “bullied” are mentioned frequently – I’d like better numbers on that stuff for each shooter
  3. More shootings. I’ve decided to go beyond NCLB, but not rule it out as a key factor in our troubled times.
    1. NCLB era shooters can be isolated from the rest of the shooters to see if they possess some unique characteristic that might point more definitively to issues caused by the parameters of NCLB

A few curious coincidences (curioundences?) I’ve found are –

  1. The prevalence of social development disorders, like autism spectrum disorder mentioned above, and
  2. The desire to enlist or successfully joining a branch of the armed forces.

All that said, here is the table that I’ve labored to produce. Again, it’s not finished, with the way things are going it’ll probably never be finished, unfortunately. If there are any variables you feel should be included, please leave a comment.

Uhh, I dont’ know why, but despite all my effort to get the data into an embedded spreadsheet, it defaults to the bottom. Scroll up a ways to see the content.

Dialectical Menialisms III – Back(lofen) and Forth

CHOICES! Keanu Reeves via Neo asserted that choice can be a form of oppression when the choices lead us to an undesirable outcome. Indeed, Geddy Lee boldly posited that “if you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice”. And who can forget the words of the bazillion-year-old knight in Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade, when he cautioned that “you must choose, but choose wisely…” That malevolent Walter Donovan chose poorly and, despite having just taken a drink, very quickly became the most dehydrated human in the history of forever. I, myself, have discussed the perils of being stuck between two choices in my critically acclaimed series “Dialectical Menialism” (found HERE and HERE). Since discovering this critical, yet sorely misunderstood facet of existence, I’ve been hypersensitive to any and all choices I’m faced with from the very specific (for example, when battling ninja robots, should I use a sword or nunchucks? Or what color sweetener packet should I use at Panera to sweeten my dark roast?), to the very broad (for example, “yes” or “no”? And the proverbial “up” or “down”).

It is concerning this very quagmire that I blog to you today, dear reader. You see, I’m part machine (more info HERE). Put briefly, I’ve a medicine pump in my abdomen delivering a constant supply of liquid baclofen to my spine, thus bypassing the stomach, the blood brain barrier, and so on. The “up and down” comes from the dosage – too high= lethargic zombie mode, too low= hypertonic spazz mode. I’ve crunched some numbers that I just made up and labored to produce some graphs to represent this conundrum.

Staggering data that affirms the supposition that more baclofen leads to a more sleepy, yet less spastic Jarrett. Conversely, less baclofen is associated with an increase in both wakefulness and muscle tension – diabolical!
Respondent were asked “would you say that higher doses of liquid baclofen result in elevated wakefulness?” If the respondent wasn’t already asleep, the answer was a very groggy “no” for ALL RESPONDENT! The chance of all or nothing is statistically remote
No surprise here. Respondent answered “yes” when asked “does a higher dose of liquid baclofen result in a decrease in spasmodic muscle behavior?”
This graph shows the (egregious) negative linear relationship between increases in dosage of liquid baclofen and a decrease in wakefulness.
The reciprocal of the “Crushing Fatigue…” graph. This line demonstrates the negatively positive linear relationship between decreased dosages of liquid baclofen and a reduction in the occurrence of NOT experiencing spasticity (what? The line has a positive slope, and one of the answers is a negative…)

These data were collected over the last six years by the Institute of Jarrett Existing and processed and quantified earlier today when I dreamed this up.

A few things to note –

  1. I use “Hypertonicity”, “spasticity” and “muscle tension” interchangeably. There are subtle differences, I know. But for my purposes, they refer to a muscle’s irrational, yet overwhelmingly persistent need to constantly contract (constranctly?)
  2. I forgot what the second one was for the moment…
  3. …Oh yeah, I don’t know that I mentioned the dialectical part of this post in plain terms. You see, with this pump I’m stuck between a state of soothed fatigue and wakeful muscle spasms. Where’s the balance? Hmmmm…I’m starting to think there isn’t one, but I have to choose, but I must choose wisely …if you choose not to decide and that proves to be the wisest choice, have you chosen wisely? Moreover, does choosing not to choose some option confound the design of the machines that control us? I have a machine in me, and I’m tempted to say that it doesn’t control me, but it certainly limits my options. So that’s what Neo was talking about…
  4. There is no spoon.

 

FIN

 

@JarrettLWilson

 

Where is Grammarland at? :P and State of the Art BO Defense

TBI is…Topics Bereft of Independence – There are many topics on my mind other than surgeries and hemorrhages. Problem is, most of these topics won’t provide enough content on their own. What am I to do? Do I allow these topics, brief as they might be, to die and rot like so much roadkill? NYET! I’ve saved all this stinking detritus and will now empty it into your head like so much garbage truck dumping its refuse at the dump. That’s right, I pretty much just said your brain is like a big heap of stinking trash. Speaking of things that belong in the trash, and not in a travel mug approaching your mouth, I made the mistake of mixing honey with black tea. I don’t know what made me think this combination would taste good (it was probably Satan). I take that back, it tasted “great”; by “great” I mean it tasted like bug guts sandwiched between two pieces of sadness. This traumatic experience and my love of words lay together and conceived a new word, this word was officially birthed on July 13th on the Twitter. It read thusly – Hoblate (Ho-blah-tey. Honey+Black Tea)-A very bad combination. Hoblate eg Dude: I’ll wear brown shoes, black slacks, brown belt & blue sport jacket to the wedding. ok? Gal: How hoblate! That doesn’t match. I redeemed myself a few days later with a scrumptious combination of cinnamon, honey, peanut butter & blackberry jelly (cinhopeabublajel). This happywich tastes like rainbow guts (I assume they’re pretty tasty) sandwiched between two pieces of happiness. The above information, when considered a particular way, can be considered data. When you read that last word, how did you pronounce it? The correct pronunciation is “DAY-TUH”. If you pronounce it “DADDUH” you are wrong and you have my scorn. The only thing that insults my ears more than “DADDUH” is when someone asks me where someone/something is at. It upset me to write the above sentence for demonstration purposes. For those of you who don’t know, ‘at’ is a preposition and prepositions can not end a sentence. When someone says this a fairy dies in grammarland; when I hear it, I feel like I’ve become a little less intelligent. Finally, we come to a topic that’s been weighing heavily on my mind. I speak, of course, of the “technology” employed to improve the stink fighting power of deodorant. Take a look at this picture –

Armpit funk has met its match – technology
Armpit funk has met its match – technology

The stick on the left is more technologically advanced because of the “Fresh Defense Technology”. When I think of technology, I think of the wheel and computers and phones and blinking indicator lights, not scented goop that I smear on my armpits. I suppose the marketing guys thought more people will buy their deodorant if they clearly labeled how technologically advanced it is. The following monologue might play out in a discerning consumer’s head – Maybe I should get Speed Stick. *Reaches for Speed Stick* Wait! I’ll be stinking in a matter of minutes with its outdated stink fighting technology! *Quickly pulls hand away* If only there was a stick with the technology to defend my freshness. *Eyes zero in on Mitchum Professional Strength* BINGO! What a relief! Later, another savvy consumer goes looking for deodorant. I wish girls couldn’t smell in the third dimension, most deodorants nowadays only eliminate odors in two dimensions. You’d think that one of these companies would capitalize on the fact that no other brand offers odor defense in all three dimensions. *Eyes widen, throat squeals with delight* Holy sh*t! Right Guard answered my prayers! No more “I’ll go out with you when your third dimension doesn’t smell like bug guts sandwiched between sadness.” I should mention that the only “technology” mentioned on most anti-perspirant/deodorant is focused on the deodorant. It seems that anti-perspirant “technology” has plateaued. I will now close the gate on the garbage truck that is my thoughts. Hopefully, you have the technology to defend against the smell 🙂 FIN @JarrettLWilson

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑