Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Fraud investigation is believing your lying eyes

bitsaboutmoney.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 221 posts

Re: Fraud investigation is believing your lying eyes

#211

Post by kristjansson »

arduanika wrote: post #206
vharuck wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The last time I heard about "little green men" (other than ETs) was to describe obviously-but-unofficially Russian soldiers who invaded Crimea in 2014 and claimed to be natives who wanted Russia to annex the region. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_occupation_of_Crimea I guess it's now being used as pejorative against groups of vaguely military style. Like the DHS agents conducting Metro Surge.

Hmm. Do you think that kristjansson was using it just to mean state-backed thugs, or were they also claiming some Russia link? (They haven't responded, and I've been downvoted for even asking the question. I am genuinely confused. I'll admit I don't follow this all very closely, but I want to understand what the phrase means here.)

Your original question was a bit of a challenge to accept earnestly. It’s a pretty charged situation; joking about ETs led me to discount it and may have led others to downvote.

That said, I described them as such because I considered the comparison to a masked and armed force of nebulous origin and ambiguous intention apt.

Re: Fraud investigation is believing your lying eyes

#212

Post by Karellen »

> if you fish in a pond known to have 50% blue fish, and pull out nine fish, you will appear to be a savant-like catcher of blue fish,

I don't get this. What does the proportion of blue fish have to do with the total number of fish you catch?

Is there some stats knowledge I'm missing?

Re: Fraud investigation is believing your lying eyes

#213

Post by refulgentis »

themacguffinman wrote: post #200
refulgentis wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The charged language (“get all the way off his back”) is unnecessary. You are responding as if I am attacking him personally or the post in general. I am not. I am repeatedly enthused about it. You are in fact, parroting positive things I am saying about it. I am on Hacker News, responding to him responding to a critic on a particular point.

Sorry I meant that humorously in the vein of Ryan George's comedy YouTube series "Pitch Meeting" where one of his catch phrases is "I'm gonna need you to get all the way off my back on that"

Hahah, I get the context now, cheers, hadn't seen it before and enjoyed it much. Thanks for the intro.

Re: Fraud investigation is believing your lying eyes

#214

Post by arduanika »

kristjansson wrote: post #211
arduanika wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hmm. Do you think that kristjansson was using it just to mean state-backed thugs, or were they also claiming some Russia link? (They haven't responded, and I've been downvoted for even asking the question. I am genuinely confused. I'll admit I don't follow this all very closely, but I want to understand what the phrase means here.)

Your original question was a bit of a challenge to accept earnestly. It’s a pretty charged situation; joking about ETs led me to discount it and may have led others to downvote. That said, I described them as such because I considered the comparison to a masked and armed force of nebulous origin and ambiguous intention apt.

Okay, understandable under the circumstances. In this case, I really did just want to know more. I did not know about the use of this phrase in the Russia/Ukraine context, so the only touchpoint I had was aliens. It was a confused guess, not a joke.

Re: Fraud investigation is believing your lying eyes

#215

Post by amiga386 »

Karellen wrote: post #212

> if you fish in a pond known to have 50% blue fish, and pull out nine fish, you will appear to be a savant-like catcher of blue fish, I don't get this. What does the proportion of blue fish have to do with the total number of fish you catch? Is there some stats knowledge I'm missing?

It's a fumbled metaphor, mixing absolute and relative numbers, and I think it's supposed to say "pull out nine blue fish".

The point the article is making is that the "reporter" turned up and alledged to have found nine cases of daycare fraud. Nine sounds like a lot, right? But the article claims the state already knew 50% of the daycares claiming its aid were frauds (this is quite debatable, don't take it as fact). Presumably that's 50% of hundreds or maybe thousands of daycares.

If blue fish were much rarer in the pond, i.e. lower percentage of daycares defrauding the government, you'd be considered a savant for fishing once and pulling out nine blue fish... but if the pond has thousands of fish and 50% are blue, it looks a lot less impressive.

Re: Fraud investigation is believing your lying eyes

#216

Post by Karellen »

amiga386 wrote: post #215
Karellen wrote: post #212

> if you fish in a pond known to have 50% blue fish, and pull out nine fish, you will appear to be a savant-like catcher of blue fish, I don't get this. What does the proportion of blue fish have to do with the total number of fish you catch? Is there some stats knowledge I'm missing?

It's a fumbled metaphor, mixing absolute and relative numbers, and I think it's supposed to say "pull out nine blue fish". The point the article is making is that the "reporter" turned up and alledged to have found nine cases of daycare fraud. Nine sounds like a lot, right? But the article claims the state already knew 50% of the daycares claiming its aid were frauds (this is quite debatable, don't take it as fact).…

Oh yeah, "nine blue fish" would make a lot more sense there.

Re: Fraud investigation is believing your lying eyes

#217

Post by laidoffamazon »

tptacek wrote: post #190
laidoffamazon wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is genuinely pathetic, Patrick. You want to say it so bad but can’t! No notes on the fraudsters pardoned by this current admin of course.

Fraudsters pardoned by the current administration don't make public service and welfare fraud in Minnesota any less grave or important, and it's super weird that people across this thread keep implying otherwise.

I frequently follow Patrick's tweets. He hasn't said a single goddamn thing about this corrupt administration but keeps talking about Gavin Newsome's vaccine policy that was in effect for 2 months in 2021

Re: Fraud investigation is believing your lying eyes

#218

Post by tptacek »

laidoffamazon wrote: post #217
tptacek wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fraudsters pardoned by the current administration don't make public service and welfare fraud in Minnesota any less grave or important, and it's super weird that people across this thread keep implying otherwise.

I frequently follow Patrick's tweets. He hasn't said a single goddamn thing about this corrupt administration but keeps talking about Gavin Newsome's vaccine policy that was in effect for 2 months in 2021

Patrick ran VaccinateCA and has lots of reasons to have opinions on how California (in particular) managed vaccination rollout. But I'm more struck by the notion that he somehow has an obligation to use his Twitter account to support your political commitments. What a weird critique.

Re: Fraud investigation is believing your lying eyes

#219

Post by foxyv »

arduanika wrote: post #122
kristjansson wrote: post #51

On Shirely, and the reaction: there's a markedly different valence to a fraud 'investigation' seeking to arrest, try, convict, and imprison _fraudsters_ vs one seeking (through a thin veil) to mar an entire community and bring about their violent dispossession at the hands of unaccountable little green men. It would not be an unreasonable person that strongly supports the former and opposes the latter.

Hmm, you completely lost me at "little green men". What/who is this referring to? Extraterrestrials?

> The "little green men"[a] were Russian soldiers who were masked and wore unmarked uniforms upon the outbreak of the Russo-Ukrainian War in 2014. They were active just before and during the Russian annexation of Crimea and carried regular weapons and equipment, but were always masked and wore distinctly unmarked green military fatigues.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_green_men_(Russo-Ukrain...

Re: Fraud investigation is believing your lying eyes

#220

Post by laidoffamazon »

tptacek wrote: post #218
laidoffamazon wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I frequently follow Patrick's tweets. He hasn't said a single goddamn thing about this corrupt administration but keeps talking about Gavin Newsome's vaccine policy that was in effect for 2 months in 2021

Patrick ran VaccinateCA and has lots of reasons to have opinions on how California (in particular) managed vaccination rollout. But I'm more struck by the notion that he somehow has an obligation to use his Twitter account to support your political commitments. What a weird critique.

I don't think he has an obligation to do anything. I just think he's a hack and your friendship is blinding you to this fact.
Post reply on HN