son

Read the article by Gladwell -  something about Ecommerce and the Internet boom  "The Real Ecommerce revolution happened offline."  So many flaws man.  Usually, he protects himself well enough so that most sides of an issue can be accounted.  However, this one, wow, a lot of flaws.  Bill Gates' Business @ the speed of typing (What about documents already made such as photos, videos, word processed files, etc.), HUGE FAIL.  And the fact that the Ecommerce was a huge time saver and more convenient and sometimes the only option for consumers is not even mentioned in an article that really focuses on that.. it only focuses on the business aspect.  Yeah, what ab out the consumer?  He sums that part up in the last sentence without giving any validity to it. 

 

His early stuff is not nearly as good nor well though out as his later stuff.  There were two other articles I had to skim 'cause the topics were bland and the writing wasn't much better.  One on Hair dye or something was absolutely a waste of time, I barely read any of it.  And his "opinion" articles are so laughable, it's so obvious why he hasn't written one in years. 

A very good writer when he shows his intelligence.  I'm surprised the Ecommerce article is so terrible. He's definitely one of the better writers out there, at least more recently.

 

Hockey today, gonna practice toe drags.  And then dominate the high school kids.

 

slow day at work, reading a lot of Gladwell.  The article on homelessness is one of the better ones I've read so far.  The one about the internal and external audience was good (The Spin Myth), though the overall message is probably skeptical.  The article on Allen Iverson is interesting, especially if you've read some of those stats articles on behindthenet and the other site on my reader.  It misses an important point - you can't alienate factors when the game is completely dynamic (sorta like hockey).  Baseball, golf, tennis, they're static because there's repeatedly a start point (serve, ball location, pitcher/hitter) and then the end point is unknown.  In Hockey and basketball, the start point is more dynamic, so there's really no way to effectively analyze these games via stats alone.    Football, well, that's obviuosly a static start point with different formations for offense and defense.

 

The article mentions something about the Win Score, an algorithm that shows the truest rank of best players in the NBA.  Let me look it up. 

Win Score Formula=(Points)+(Rebounds)+(Steals)+(½Assists)+(½Blocked Shots)-(Field Goal Attempts)-(Turnovers)-½(Free Throw Attempts)-½Personal Fouls

hahahahahahahahahahaha.  wow.  absolute fail.  There's no mention of quality of teammates, quality of competition.  +/- (whatever basketball would call this if they have  this type of statistic).  I read some of those hockey stats articles, not many, and the quality stats are those dealing with teammates and competition.  Then again, no single statistic can show the best player in any league.  I mean, come on, how can you say that "hey, my Win Score formula ranks the best players in the league," wtih a serious face when there will always be a subjectivity to how people rate them.  Obviuosly though, the Sedins and Crosby are in the top 4 in the NHL, no questions asked.  The 4th could be, well, up for debate and anywhere between 2nd and 4th, Crosby is #1.  Don't need stats to tell you that.

 

There's another article on how stats are ponitless 'cause statisticians can make the results fit their model.. haven't read it yet, but It looks interesting.