Why am I impersonating computer support?! I am not computer support! Ask the guy sitting next to me!
(The problem is, they don't tend to explain stuff unless you corner them. And I'm being used as a proxy. Kind of annoying.)
Book: Yes, I'd forgotten you're moonlighting as a criminal mastermind now. Got your next heist planned? Simon: No. But I'm thinking about growing a big black mustache. I'm a traditionalist.
'War Stories'
Natter 47: My Brilliance Is Wasted On You People
Off-topic discussion. Wanna talk about corsets, duct tape, or physics? This is the place. Detailed discussion of any current-season TV must be whitefonted.
sarameg - Oct 17, 2006 7:50:49 am PDT #3963 of 10001
Connie Neil - Oct 17, 2006 7:51:42 am PDT #3964 of 10001
brillig
they don't tend to explain stuff unless you corner them
It preservers our air of mystery.
sarameg - Oct 17, 2006 7:52:50 am PDT #3965 of 10001
It preservers our air of mystery.
It makes everyone here hate them, frankly.
Connie Neil - Oct 17, 2006 7:53:33 am PDT #3966 of 10001
brillig
It makes everyone here hate them, frankly.
Hate, fear, it's all the same to the techies.
§ ita § - Oct 17, 2006 7:53:52 am PDT #3967 of 10001
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
Unless that figure is counting all marriages, which includes widows remarrying.
Nope--it's age at first marriage.
Theodosia - Oct 17, 2006 7:57:19 am PDT #3968 of 10001
'we all walk this earth feeling we are frauds. The trick is to be grateful and hope the caper doesn't end any time soon"
Connie Neil - Oct 17, 2006 7:59:47 am PDT #3969 of 10001
brillig
"I'm very bendy."
Topic!Cindy - Oct 17, 2006 8:03:53 am PDT #3970 of 10001
What is even happening?
I'm very surprised that the median age for females getting married in 1890 is so high. In my genealogy, most of the girls at that time period were married before 20.
edit: Unless that figure is counting all marriages, which includes widows remarrying.
If you're talking about this chart [link] it says 'first marriage' so I don't think it does. I was surprised, too. I like (and think in) means more than medians, though. My maternal great grandmother was 14 when she got married (in the 1890s). Her daughter (my grandmother) was 17 when she got married in the 1920s. They were in Nova Scotia, though. It changed a lot in the next generation. Looks like my mom was nearly four years above the median, when she married at 24 in the 1960s. I was 3 years above the median, when I married at 27 in the 90s.
Stats people,
Is there a particular advantage to looking at the median, rather than the mean, in a table like the one linked above?
flea - Oct 17, 2006 8:05:41 am PDT #3971 of 10001
information libertarian
Question - does anybody know if there's a way to get TimesSelect coverage if you aren't an individual subscriber to the paper? We've (at work, in a library) found that Stanley Fish's columns, for example, aren't in the print edition, and don't make it into Lexis or Factiva. The library has a print subscription, but it's institutional and doesn't include TimesSelect (it's not an option).
bon bon - Oct 17, 2006 8:07:35 am PDT #3972 of 10001
It's five thousand for kissing, ten thousand for snuggling... End of list.
I'm not surprised about the median figure because there's a much larger group of marriageable people on the older side of 20 than the younger side.