I had to rescue Dad from Elko once while I was driving back Seattle because he had a major stomach flu and his carpool left him behind. Had to detour down a windy canyon in a blizzard with like 5 foot visibility and I'd start fish tailing any time I drove over 10 mph. Elko seemed nice enough though.

This is exactly what I argued for months. It's not sustainable! But the airport considerations won me over in the end.

So annoying! This was ultimately the reason we hyphenated our kids' last names. Both their names have like 10 syllables now, but I'm less likely to get detained at an airport.

Essentially anything by Brandon Sanderson

Wish I had seen this earlier...

Great thread! We make this point in the NEJM paper, but I think it flew under the radar for many.

I think I ultimately disagree too, but I thought it was thought provoking. Like the case where maybe a parent is asked to share their DNA and they explicitly say they don't consent. Genotyping a sibling and then imputing their DNA may be legal, but it feels icky, no?

The CCT paper has a discussion of why you should use the conventional bw even with the correction due to coverage maybe, but I'm lost. I'm getting pretty close to a 5% T1 error rate even when I use the larger bw. Has anyone smarter than me thought through this and can tell me what I'm missing?

I ran a few quick simulations with quartic trends and local linear regression, but used bw's at different multiples of the CCT bw. As expected, using uncorrected estimates, the MSE is minimized at the CCT bw, but the bias-corrected estimate's MSE is minimized at a 2-3 times larger bw.

I am unreasonably proud of this joke, but I'm worried that no one will get it... simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tau_(ma...

"No, no, Patrick. We all got it. It just wasn't very funny," you all reply.

I feel like you lied to me a couple months ago... (Mine vomited down the front of my shirt during the 5am bottle this morning.)
bsky.app/profile/elim...

Thanks, Jenn!