morphsci

I like the way you think.

Actually using the MBA and the iPad works well for me and actually helps with the battery life on the MBA. Most email checking and responding as well as interwebz is done on the iPad. I also keep the brightness toned down and have a short window for turning off the screen when on battery. It comes back up quick enough with the flash storage that it has never really been a problem.

I would rather have my two HP 25" monitors at work and the remaining dollars for whisk(e)y and gin.

I agree with Dan. For most things I do the 11" screen works fine. When it doesn't I have a 24" Samsung monitor that shares duty as my Windows home Server monitor. Even if I won the lottery (and I owned a computer with a Thunderbolt port) I probably would not buy the Thunderbolt display.

Happy Birthday Mr. TechnoGrill!

I have the first generation MBA 11 and am quite happy. I felt no need to upgrade with the newer model and do not miss a slightly bigger screen. My wife has a 13" MBP and compared to the MBA it feels like a 2 ton tank.

The p value is invariant. However my interpretation would likely vary, mostly by amount, not type, of alcohol consumed

I prefer p = 0.0745. Then discussing its biological relevance/nonrelevance in the discussion.

Nope. I was only asking for SPDIF inputs. No drivers required. If they can't do that then I'm not sure I have much confidence in their engineering team. They are definitely behind the curve on this one.

Yeah, that's pretty much a bullshit response.

Happy Birthday!

You're a thought leader.

Probably virtually untying some knots.

Exactly why it has no real meaning, other than to make you feel good. My conclusion is that the results of both experiments are probably the same and "Shit, I should have done a power analysis before data collection!" Yep. Which is why I am not a strict Frequentist, Bayesian or Model selectionist.

Well I do not know if this will be strictly relevant for you but the first edition of this was what led me to start questioning typical Popperian/Fisherian hypothesis testing methodologies. http://www.amazon.com/Model-Selection-Multi-Model-Inference-Information-Theoretic/dp/1441929738/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1329078313&sr=8-1

Do you treat your effects as fixed or random? Many biological effects should be treated as random and thus you have entered, willingly or not, the realm of Bayesian statistics. I do not align myself with either camp BTW.

The problem with an arbitrary significance level is you are abdicating your respondibility to determine FOR YOUR PARTICULAR EXPERIMENT what a significant result is. This is both a statistical and field dependent process that is too complex to be adequately assessed by a simple apriori alpha (if nothing else it ignores beta and especially in medical trials or tests the risk to the patient of an alpha or beta error is not symmetric). So the preferred methodology in the fields of biology I currently work in is to report your exact p value for your test(s) and then discuss that value in reference to your biological hypothesis. Stating that your value is significant/not significant does not add any additional information. If you performed two experiments that resulted in the following two p values, exp. 1: p = 0.049, exp. 2: p = 0.051 what would you conclude?

Not sure as the HDMI is limited to stereo (or maybe 2.1) tracks. Interesting Mike. I have decided not to go the Amarra 4 upgrade route. The problem I have with the Oppo is it does not have an SPDIF input.

RIP Whitney

The level of significance is arbitrary because as you stated, it can be any value. Therefore you simply calculate the p value, which is the actual probability of making a Type I error. The whole idea of a significance level is archaic. It's only usefulness is in introductory classes and to explain what an actual probability value of a test statistic is. Confidence levels are also arbitrary as you can calculate them for any level of confidence between 0 and 1. At least in biology we are rapidly moving away from the idea of statistical significance. The Bayesians have given up on it a long time ago. Now back to your regularly scheduled program.

He actually had it in sideways anyway.

Actually a significance level, or more correctly an alpha level (the type I error rate) is not actually necessary. One can simply calculate the probability of the test and utilize it in the context of the original hypothesis without the need of a totally arbitrary alpha level.

He only listened with one ear.

Sorry to hear your family joined the puking kids contingent Dan. Definitely no fun. Hope this passes quickly.

Absolutely sucks. Hope they get well soon.