The Problem With Talking To People
Вставка
- Опубліковано 28 лис 2022
- If you can’t trust yourself, then who can you trust? Well… everyone and no one. The paradox of self-reporting in all manners of data collection, from basic census information to detailed stats about crime, makes it difficult for us to understand the problems we need to solve. Is it best to design experiments and carefully cull datasets to observe the information we need? Should we rely solely on testimony directly from people involved, and then trust that their answers are correct? Is the right answer a blend of the two?
The truth is that they all have serious problems that lead us down the wrong path for making sense of social behavior. But if they’re all awful, how can it possibly be useful to employ every strategy together?
To understand crime, we need to measure crime. To measure crime, we need to understand people. And all of it relies on a deep knowledge of individuals who employ malevolence, who are victims of flawed and biased systems, or who are just plain wrong in good faith.
In a way, it’s hopeless -- but in the morass of human social behavior, we manage to progress.
** ADDITIONAL READING **
“Survey of Prison and Jail Inmates: Background and Method,” Peterson, Chaiken, Ebener, Honig (1982): www.rand.org/pubs/notes/N1635...
“Extent of Unrecorded Juvenile Delinquency: Tentative Conclusions,” Short and Nye (1959): scholarlycommons.law.northwes...
“Measurement Error in Self-Reported Health Variables,” Butler, Burkhauser, Mitchell and Pincus (1987): www.jstor.org/stable/1935959
“A Comparison of Participant Observation and Survey Data,” Vidich and Shapiro (1955): www.jstor.org/stable/2088196
“Bias in Interviewing in Studies of Opinions, Attitudes, and Consumer Wants,” Hart (1948): www.jstor.org/stable/3143052
“Deception in Social Research I: Kinds of Deception and the Wrongs They May Involve.” Sieber (1982): www.jstor.org/stable/3564511
“Measuring bias in self-reported data,” Rosenman, Tennekoon, Hill (2011): www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/arti...
** LINKS **
Vsauce2:
TikTok: / vsaucetwo
Twitter: / vsaucetwo
Facebook: / vsaucetwo
Talk Vsauce2 in The Create Unknown Discord: / discord
Vsauce2 on Reddit: / vsauce2
Hosted and Produced by Kevin Lieber
Instagram: / kevlieber
Twitter: / kevinlieber
Podcast: / thecreateunknown
Research and Writing by Matthew Tabor
/ tabortcu
Editing by John Swan
/ @johnswanyt
Huge Thanks To Paula Lieber
www.etsy.com/shop/Craftality
Vsauce's Curiosity Box: www.curiositybox.com/
#education #vsauce #crime - Наука та технологія
A wise man once said: “Light travels faster than sound. That’s why certain people appear bright before you hear them speak.”
I just saw you on film theory
Bot
fake
This is the hardest Mustache Guy comment I’ve ever seen. 🔥🔥🔥
nevermind i read the name wrong
You've convinced me, I'll never talk to anyone ever again.
I TALK TO MYSELF IT IS THE ONLY WAY I CAN GET A CLEVER RESPONSE LOL [Dec 8, 2022 ]
😂😂
Smart move, very intelligent move my friend.
I cant help but agree
Yeah, self reporting only really works in certain situations. You have to be really good at among us to pull it off
I kept thinking about AMOGUS everytime he mentionned self reporting x)
Oh no
Lol, I see what you did there
😂😂😂
Sus
My statistics professor once said 'Numbers don't lie, but you can get numbers to lie for you'
That doesn’t make any sense. It’s like saying “Mark doesn’t lie, but you can get mark to lie for you.” 😂
@@dionysus3774 yes, you can make mark lie for you if you make the right question that gives the answer you want
More like you can lie with numbers
@@dionysus3774 it makes a lot of sense, it's about changing your language and asking the right questions so Mark can lie for you unintentionally.
That's what is used in Police interviews.
I'm an accountant. I make numbers lie for a living. Or at least make them bend the rules a little bit 😂
Given the title, I, an introvert with extreme social anxiety, did not expect this to be the topic of the video
As a fellow introvert, I too was shocked
I agree with your statement, as an introvert
I too, as an introvert was very shocked
Knowing V-Sauce2 we always end up at criminal psychology somehow 😆
Yea, I was thinking the video was going to be more around the idea of "I am grout" where talking to ppl is useless since they tend to only hear what they want to hear not what's actually trying to be conveyed.
Question: “Have you ever had a fist fight with one person?”
Immediate thought: “Doesn’t a fist fight require at least two people?”
Lol, not if you have a bag of weed and a bottle of bourbon. If you have acid or mushies you can fight an interstellar war alone in the bush.
Well, you and the person
fightclub
I mean, I don't know how I could get a single, independent fist to fight with one whole person, but ok vsauce.
@@user-nl2kr1nk9s Facts!
As My favorite doctor used to say: " everybody lies".
Lol. Your favourite fictional doctor.
Pretty sure he also used to say "It's never Lupus"
I wonder how Kevin can fit that into a video...?
House
Doogie Howser grew up and changed his name to Gregory House.
Every night for hours on end.
Then I awake and get vertical.
thought this was supposed to be the problem with talking to people, not the problem with self reporting.
I think the following study should exist: get people to describe a commonly seen loved one to a sketch artist. I don't think most would do very well.
that’s just a game of telephone
@@tonoornottono that analogy kind of speaks to the point, yeah
Just the tip of the iceberg. The most fascinating study to me was Hall Johansson and Strandberg in 2012 on Choice Blindness. They asked people their opinions, secretly switched the answer, then asked them to explain. And most people not only didn't notice, they came up with explanations for this new (opposite) answer.
Our brains are not nearly as rational as we like to think they are. And the more emotions get involved, the worse it gets.
Woooow!
Oh to be a human in this world today... With all this scientific knowledge and proof on your table... And you still choose to believe in free will...
I think this study is one of the many that proves, unintentionally, the absence of free will.
@@yokobyeol6255 👏👏👏we have will power, but it certainly isn't free😁
@@yokobyeol6255 the ability to make a choice proves free will, the ability to be easily fooled proves people are fools
This phenomenon was featured in Michael's video, "The Future of Reasoning", if anyone's interested.
In a statistics class at uni I learned a way of mostly eliminating "embarrassment bias" during a survey. The example they tried on the class was: flip two coins (only you know the outcomes). If the first coin is heads, answer the question "have you ever taken illegal drugs?" If the first coin is tails, answer the question "has the second coin come up heads?" It's not possible for the questioner to know which question was answered, which hopefully eliminates lying, yet it's still possible to get the frequency of drug use by applying mathematical analysis to the totals, taking into account the 50% of answers that will be simply random. Clever, I thought.
And no, I can't remember how many students had taken drugs, sorry! It was a long time ago :)
605 crimes a year? Those guys have a real work ethics, goddamn. They deserve an award or something.
Imagine getting all 605 crimes by public nudity. Easy speedrun top 1 criminal any %.
Even in winter? Or do you make up for that by working seasonally? @@alexturnbackthearmy1907
You can be criminal for day, do like 2 crimes, and here you are, 605 crimes per year in statistic.
Maybe a Darwin award?
@@alexturnbackthearmy1907 That's way too conspicuous. You'd be arrested on the third naked downtown expedition at most. You can probably still walk around naked in jail, but that would make dropping the soap seem wise. Also, yes. I do understand the concept of a joke. I'm just too much of a smartass to not say this.
My school measured my height during gym class. One time I had a recent doctors appointment so I just reported the height they gave me at the doctors. It was after that that I realized the school’s measurements were less than accurate as it made it look like I hit a growth spurt and then shrunk again when they remeasured me later
It helps when you have free healthcare and in some cases even benefits when you go to regular doctor check-ups; they get a decent population sample for whatever measurements, blood work, etc. they do at that time.
@@amunak_ American here. Healthcare is $$$$
@@amunak_ I don't think you know what the word"free" means.
Working in a medical lab has blessed me with the opportunity to see statistics vs human actions/responses. You can't truly believe either fully, because there's a disconnect in what's communicated and what's actually happened. Statistics don't lie, but they don't paint a clear picture, and people lie, but cannot tell you everything that's happened because of the grossly neglected nuances that take place between statistics and actions. Both are complicated matters attempting to be made and seen in a simple way, which, directly or indirectly, is the cause of disconnection from what's actually happening
I really appreciate this comment thank u I screenshotted it lol
3:50 This explains why I've always bought my jeans in the same size for almost 10 years, and it's a surprise every time whether they fit or not. The same size should always fit the same, but sometimes they are too wide, then too tight, too long or even too short. But according to the label, it's always the same size. And it's not me, because my old ones that fit then still fit me.
I vanity sizing is the worst, at the rate things are going I'm going to be buying my clothes from the kids section again soon. My body hasn't changed all that much in 2 decades but extra extra small is getting too big. 🤦♀️
You didn't know about this? This is like... extremely deeply established cultural knowledge and has been for years lol
@@JackrabbitCraftshey size women's clothing too small and men's clothing too big, because apparently most women want to feel petite and men big and strong. I just want it to be realistic. I am the spot on definition of an average size male at 5'9" 175lb. Yet most clothing I have to buy in a large, and on occasion XL. Give me a break, I am as medium as they come. I am not a "large" person by any means.
@@JackrabbitCrafts ive heard people say they havent ‘changed’ in size but actually have and often for the increase, weight and size aren’t always equally correlating
Introverts: Ah, a man of culture I see
I think part of the problem is the disparity between the types of people who are good at math and statistics barely overlaps with the types of people who have a good, deep, thorough understanding of what makes people tick. This empathy gap leads to statisticians analyzing stats they have no true understanding off as anything other than numbers, without sufficient contexts, and intuitive and perceptive empaths getting lost in a sea of numbers they cannot navigate.
Oh yes. The Conversation article about Cognitive Flexibility is great. So we keep having Maths / Physics / Chemistry / Bio types yelling at Philosophy, Psychology, Sociology, Economics and other Humanities:"You're not real scientists posers!"
To which My People yell back "Get out of your basement nerd there's more to life than numbers!" ;
in the hilarious Science vs Science Infighting. I'm good at people, semi-reformed Master Troll. I am *terrible* at Maths despite IQ 140+ and also knowing people's perception of IQ is woefully misguided. When it comes to debates I learn from those smarter than me and ruin those who come at me with arrogance no matter what their speciality is. I may not have the data, but I've the awareness of the most common Cognitive Biases and Logical Fallacies. I take *great* pleasure in pointing those out in other people and seeing how they react.
They go TURBO, I win, they're silent, I win, or I learn something new, I win. I have a playlist for Critical Thinking if anyone is interested :) Great content from other channels. I don't make my own yet and mine would be the kind of harsh political satire that is possibly not suitable for UA-cam.
...You haven't spent a lot of time with mathematicians, have you? You'll find those are some of the sweetest, most empathic (and funniest) people you'll ever meet!
Kind of. Often people work in multidisciplinary groups to get this conclusions. But there are always limits on giving chance to bright to all of these dimensions humans can have
@@sammyjones8279 I was talking about statisticians, actually. Pure maths types tend to be sweet dreamers like me. :)
Bruh you didn’t have to put all that force in that right hook, but I like it
"So is this all hopeless?..
...Yeah, it's hopeless" 😂😂
Always has been
Although I’m only middle aged, I’ve held an assertion about honesty since my childhood and it’s never once been proven wrong. It may not be possible to disprove it, but in some ways, it may only bluster its credibility. No matter how honest someone may try to be, whether maximally or minimally, they will say demonstrably faulted statements on a fairly regular basis. Nobody knows absolute truth about anything so nobody can be 100% honest. Furthermore even the most prolific liar in your life will lie in a predictable manner. The more prolific, the easier it is to predict what they want you to think and what they are trying to hide. You just need to know them a little.
1 + 1 = 2 is true 🤓
U come across as a liar
@@FunoyingSounds In certain contexts... In others, not so much.
@@travcollier Given a deterministic system, if we know all the conditions, we can always find out the outcome of that condition and that will never change regardless of what you think. So to claim we know absolutely nothing is an underestimation. Since we live in a world that's probabilitistic/stochastic, we could argue that we won't know the outcome even if we know all the given conditions but since probabilistic systems can create deterministic ones, we could know the deterministic part of the system. For example, regardless of how the world change, given the statement has the same definition as the time of writing, In boolean algebra, not true will always equals to false.
@@FunoyingSounds Do you need a towel?
The problem isn't in asking people to talk about themselves. The problem is not being an active listener. A survey cannot be an active listener. Surveys can only ever be useful in scenarios like the last one mentioned; when the results are significantly outside your expectations. And even then, since it's part of a survey you can't be confident in any interpretation of the data.
I really like that perspective
You're missing the point. It's data verification and data accuracy that matters. Interpretation is secondary to this issue. Something isn't science unless there is verification and that verification is accurate.
@@Anon0nline Yes, something isn't science unless there is verification, but it also isn't science without a hypothesis. With the hard sciences, most of the focus and review goes into the methodology and the verification, but even hard science can struggle to reach a consensus. Just take all of the different interpretations of quantum mechanics for example.
For surveys and the social sciences this problem is so much harder. The landscape of hypotheses that can fit any given data is enormous. All you truly know from polling a group of people is that the specific people you polled clicked certain radio buttons. You could verify the button they pressed with perfect accuracy, but without a dialogue, deriving any hypothesis or interpretation of that person's mental state at the time is a lot harder and a lot more subjective.
no. no no no no. you're looking at this wrong. criminal activity is /creative/ and is therefore a PARETO distribution, not a normal distribution. it's exponential. not normative. your numbers and percentages of distribution are wrong because your assumption is wrong.
@@plopsmcgee9672 You need to brush up on epistemic differentials and propositional calculus. They eliminate narrativistic concepts in consensus debates. I suggest the works of Popper.
vsauce content changed a lot but still always interesting topic with math
Jesse knows a lot about Math. Especially the blue one.
Sometimes it's better to have a bad information, then no information and sometimes it's not
The more you know, the more you know. That can be an asset, or... not.
@@Vsauce2 True! ^^
Omg wouldn't it be great if clothes sizes were standardized?
For women's clothes, sometimes they aren't even standardized within brands.
This reminds me of the story “In the Grove” where the murderer, victim, and victim’s wife all say they killed the victim. (A medium was used to contact the victim while he was in limbo)
My head was spinning before I saw the bit in parentheses
Isn't that the plot of Rashomon?
Now I remember the short-story but it was called In a Grove.
@@tomstonemale Yes. Rashomon by Akiru Kurasawa
As an autistic person, I also find going to the source isn’t the easiest way to communicate.
I was always suspicious about statistics in relation to crime. I thank you for putting these videos out! We are so much driven by data nowadays that nobody seems to care about what the numbers really mean. So these videos are essential to the understanding of the world around us. Thanks a lot for that!
no. no no no no. you're looking at this wrong. criminal activity is /creative/ and is therefore a PARETO distribution, not a normal distribution. it's exponential. not normative. your numbers and percentages of distribution are wrong because your assumption is wrong.
Statistics and policing should never mix. When it happens, it becomes a numbers game. Do statistics help in the law enforcement area? Sometimes... conditionally... and with exceptions.
@@MulletMan1313
You are right. Like the last part about 90th percentiles committing majority of the crimes … skewed?… not skewed at all! Simple Pareto distribution 80/20.
20% of the criminals commit 80% of the crimes. Would be easy to account for what the 50th percentile’s numbers should now be, and nowhere close to the “average”.
“YOU can’t even trust you!” Facts bruh
everytime you upload it's like christmas lol, keep up the good work kevin
Ksi guy
I don't get how someone could not know how tall they are, like I want to lie to myself and say I'm 6' but I've been 5'11 since like forever, and it hasn't changed.
Haven't been to the doctor's in over 3 years and can't remember the last time my height was taken. I also don't actively measure my height, so a lot people ballpark the answer. All I know is im "around" 174cm
Yo. Dude in a wheelchair here. This can be EXTREMELY problematic, doctors ask me if I can make a guess/rough estimate on my height. It’s because these things change DRAMATICALLY over time, and that’s if we even can be sure in the first place. They’d have had to lie me down to figure that out, and no one ever had. That’s only the first part. The rest is that I have spina bifida, also being in a sitting position pretty much all the time, affects things, dramatically, over time.
I literally always thought I was 5'6" until I went to the doctor recently and they told me 5'7"! So you'd be surprised
Adding to that, your height changes from morning throughout the day.
The question for me is why would I bother remembering my height to more than one sigfig, if even that? It's irrelevant information 99.9% of the time, a waste of brainspace I could spend on my job or figuring out the DNA Digivolution chart of digimon world 2 mods.
"Have you ever had a fist fight with one person?" I immediately thought why would I have a fist fight by myself.
Beautifully provocative and thought-provoking as always. Thank you.
no. no no no no. you're looking at this wrong. criminal activity is /creative/ and is therefore a PARETO distribution, not a normal distribution. it's exponential. not normative. your numbers and percentages of distribution are wrong because your assumption is wrong.
Moral of the video: Data gathering is a nightmare and people lie
This was something, man. Truly special. Thanks for this.
Criminal Georg, who lives in jail and commits over 10,000 crimes each day, is an outlier and should not have been counted
I haven't seen a spiders georg meme in years, thank you.
"Have you ever had a fistfight with 1 person?"
No I only do group fights and pile-ons
I actually thought that was going to be the bias in that data. Not "What constitutes a fist fight", but "Does that mean you've had a first fight with *at least* one person, or one person only?"
Keep up this series, incredible work!
no. no no no no. you're looking at this wrong. criminal activity is /creative/ and is therefore a PARETO distribution, not a normal distribution. it's exponential. not normative. your numbers and percentages of distribution are wrong because your assumption is wrong.
My actual height is 5’7 and 3 quarters so you best believe I’m gonna round up to 5’8
My height changes by at least an inch throughout the day. 😂 I'm missing a vertebra from a compression fracture that nuked it into nonexistence, and my extra cartilaginous gap compresses throughout the day.
I can't even accurately self-report my own height if I wanted to.
What's the goal? I think we often ask questions to get the result we want.
-- The police want an arrest and a prosecutor wants a conviction, not necessarily punishment of the guilty.
-- A parent wants to create a good adult (out of their child), not determine who wrote on the wall.
-- Some dude at a bar wants to get laid, not learn the life story of the woman he's trying to pick up.
The questions are often more of a lie than the answer.
I agree, but your first point is a little misleading. Prosecutors absolutely just want an arrest, but the defendant also absolutely only wants a dismissal. The US legal system, and many others around the world, is predicated on this idea: if both parties use equal measures, then the advantage of truth will determine the victor. That is to say, if defendants use all measures at their disposal to defend themselves, and the prosecutors uses all measures at their disposal to convict the defendants, then whoever is CORRECT will succeed.
@@bable6314 Whoever has the most measures at their disposal will succeed. I'm not sure how you jumped to "correct."
I hope his videos are preserved forever
the more you think about this the more frustrating it becomes.
Love the videos, keep them up! Always very interesting topics.
no. no no no no. you're looking at this wrong. criminal activity is /creative/ and is therefore a PARETO distribution, not a normal distribution. it's exponential. not normative. your numbers and percentages of distribution are wrong because your assumption is wrong.
Great, relevant and though provoking as usual.
That’s why nutrition science is often such a struggle to do research on. You need a big sample size and it’s not practical to monitor all of those people and every they eat\do. So often there’s no other option other than surveys.
As always, thanks for the video!
You’re the only vsauce still going, and I appreciate that!
Dude that was fantastic work great job
Thank you Mr.Vause for giving me trust issue toward myself
That's why I only talk with commenters on video threads. They aren't people.
GREAT vid, Kevin. Thanks for producing ;) I miss the old soundtrack, it was so gorgeous ...
I once got a call on the phone to do a survey, and I almost hung up on them part way through it because whenever I asked clarifying questions, the other person said "just do your best". I think I ended up skipping half the questions instead.
I like the route from scepticism to "get at least something".
no. no no no no. you're looking at this wrong. criminal activity is /creative/ and is therefore a PARETO distribution, not a normal distribution. it's exponential. not normative. your numbers and percentages of distribution are wrong because your assumption is wrong.
@@MulletMan1313 who are you replying to?
@@MulletMan1313 numbers and percentages of distribution based on assumptions, sure bro, cool words
@@3jesus3christ3 yeah, the assumption that criminal activity is normally distributed, which is incorrect, and as a creative endeavor, is a Pareto distribution. I stand by it. Do you have a better idea in mind?
Love your videos!
Interesting topic. I think that criminal justice needs the (potentially skewed) data to help determine the kind and length of rehab for inmates. Depending on the individual in the system, they'll need as specialized rehab as possible (more violent, less direct contact with others, ways to expel the violence, etc., where a non-violent petty theft might need more obvious forms of storage. Stuff like that.).
Overall an interesting video but I'm sad to see more and more shilling for speculation-based companies. They have a place in our system, but having them advertised to people doesn't sit well with me.
4:47 Well she isn't wrong, that's what I used to think about shooting when I started learning English.
Loving the crime series of videos. Keep 'em coming Kevin.
no. no no no no. you're looking at this wrong. criminal activity is /creative/ and is therefore a PARETO distribution, not a normal distribution. it's exponential. not normative. your numbers and percentages of distribution are wrong because your assumption is wrong.
@@MulletMan1313 I think that is part of the point of this video. Without doing the research people will make assumptions (e.g. that a typical burglar will do a typical number of burglaries, and the numbers will fit a bell curve)
Obviously to keep the video relatively short Kevin couldn't explain everything (whole courses would only begin to do it) so didn't look at, or try to explain, why the curve is exponential.
4:46 thats absolutely hilarious, she had an amazing sense of humor
yknow thats an interesting point. i am an observant person, both inside and out, but im sure there are things about myself that i miss all the time that other people pick up on. course, a lot of friends that i have arent really that observant, but im sure at least one of them knows something about me that i dont. if there were two of me in a room, id probably learn a lot more about myself than i already have.
As an introvert, I can agree with the title of this video
I listen to a Philidelphia morning radio show, every show starts with a "news segment." Each segment starts with the latest shootings from the previous night. Makes the city seem a lot more dangerous than it really is.
Exceptional stuff lately. Social psych is such a compelling field.
I love the ”… right? WRONG!…”
People who are diagnosed with anti-social personality disorder are a minority of prison inmates but they tend to be responsible for the most serious offences and they might even get away with crime more often.
It's not useless It brings your ideas to life and allows you to rethink things as you say them you construct a world and think deeper on topics when you talk about them and communicate with others the sharing of information
Every minute talking to someone is a minute not watching Vsauce2.
That reminds me of the fact predictive algorithms from social media (which looks at likes, comments and time spent on articles) are better at determining the kind of person you are than censuses.
Richmond CA had one of the highest crime rates in the country, they figured out that the vast majority (>90%) of the crimes were being committed by a small group of people (
Words are kind of slippery. It starts with the person who's asked: he doesn't know, misremembers, lies, is inaccurate, is ignorant of things, interprets differently. Then all this is compressed into speech, which isn't perfect thought, it's just a meme. Then that has to be picked up by the listener, who has the same flaw. I sometimes wonder how communication works as well as it does.... probably because we're so similar
observing someone only shows how that someone acts when he is in typical situations. I was really surprised what I'm capable off when i am pushed to the limit.
I’d start a conversation about this, but I rather wouldn’t
Ryu said it best - "Talk is cheap"
I spotted the most rare thing on youtube, an actual VSauce video. I think this is the day I go buy a lottery ticket!
Amazing!
nice among us tips, i’ll sure know better next time
So, then the question is how do we get unreported information, do computers watch crimes for us, what about recorded crimes?
What do recorded crimes tell us and how do they differ from what people tell us?
Is the difference consistent amongst types of people and what does it tell us about other cases where there weren't cameras?
It's not just unreported information, it's a lack of verification of information, a lack of accuracy, and issues with narrative over-matching.
This dilemma is everywhere tbh.
It’s like criminals who don’t get caught, they aren’t ever represented either because they got away, probably somewhat smart? Where as the ones that get caught are often dumb.. etc.
Same issue with iq tests, granted most the sample data is from ppl who sought to take one, again, most dumb ppl aren’t signing up to take them .. flawed data.
So even when you think it’s “verifiably accurate”, there’s still likely variables that aren’t being considered.
As a data analyst, it’s basically a guessing game. You find the most confirmations to support a decision and go with the best choice possible given the current data you have.
It would be interesting to know if questions which ask about other peoples opinions make a difference. For example, asking "would other people say you are generous?" rather than "are you generous?"
don't ever ask those questions. people with even a slight compulsion for accuracy end up having anxiety attacks since they're physically impossible to answer.
When someone tries to gatekeep against you, remind them that many non-diabetic doctors treat diabetes
I'm a type one diabetic. My doctor is not. I fully trust that woman with my life.
Idk after watching your videos i feel like i learned that i didn't know something.
It's like those retail store leaf blower ratings in MPH, when it's all about the thrust force in pounds/ounces!...BTW, the avg. speed of the avg. air molecule at room temp is ~1000 MPH
So is Kevin currently in school for criminal psychology or forensics or something? He seems to have a lot of time dedicated to this sort of video.
@@MulletMan1313 stop replying this to every comment doofus
Have you guys been posting? Cause this is the first time ive seen a video of you in more than 2 years😫
Kevin posts here on VSauce2 regularly, but the UA-cam algorithm seem to be against him, and seems to bury a lot of the notifications.
this video series deserves some sort of award
no. no no no no. you're looking at this wrong. criminal activity is /creative/ and is therefore a PARETO distribution, not a normal distribution. it's exponential. not normative. your numbers and percentages of distribution are wrong because your assumption is wrong.
@@MulletMan1313 i think you replied to the wrong comment brother
Thank you
As an introvert, the content of this video was fascinating, but not the confirmation bias I was hoping for.
What the heck is this emoji icon in the bottom right corner of my phone to react to parts of the video?
"the Madlib that is ... sentencing guideline" 😆I can't stop laughing at that one.
3:12. Not necessarily. I work in an ER where we track every patient's height and weight. Except we don't. Because only a few medications are based on weight for adults we only actually check people's weight if we anticipate giving one of those meds (e.g. TNK for strokes). This means we allow people to tell us their height and weight and that's what goes in their chart or we estimate. Not very accurate. No medications are based off of height for adults and for pediatrics everything is weight based so we measure weight but estimate height unless it's an emergency in which case we might use a length based dosage chart (commonly called braslow). I often enter pediatrics height as 0'0" to indicate that I didn't bother measuring it, but it still goes to some national database. One I'm slowly filling up with infinitesimally small children that still have mass.
8:01
Vsause2: "Probably the most obvious problem with self-reporting is that people lie."
House MD: Perfection.
TL;DR: courtesy of dr. House: "Everybody lies".
I recently told someone my height was just under 6feet. This was based on my height taken 25 years ago which was just over 6 feet and I remember I was wearing shoes. The person questioned me. I measured my height a couple of days later and was surprised to find that I am 5feet 11 inches. My weight can change by 5lbs (2 kg) in a week depending on how active I am and what I eat also it can be a larger change if I weigh myself at different times of day.
Sometimes I get myself into trouble by speaking. Never intentionally but it is what it is. Some people love me but some people just hate me on sight seemingly for no reason, and it's taken 30 years to make my peace with that, and realise that it's mostly because I'm a poet and a philosopher which is just too much blah blah blah for some people.
Whenever I notice that I'm stuck in a negative social feedback loop like that, I just take a vow of silence for a week or a month or so, to reset my brain. It helps me notice my own thoughts and feelings more clearly, and I learn to read people more intuitively and LISTEN to what they have to say more attentively.
Also gives my wife a great opportunity to teach me sign language.
Those three questions you asked, I answered all three. I was exactly correct because I answered simply yes or no, now YOU manipulated the outlook of MY answer because YOU did not elaborate, hence going off and trying to discredit my answer for your failure to elaborate.....and weaker minds will fall for that.... Our minds and memories are way stronger than we are given credit for... Most due too peoples ego, people simply trying to get over on you or their minds are Soo clouded with their own judgement of themselves.
Random soul😎 following now!✌️
7:55 "Wait. People lie?!? Since when?!?"
"The precambrian era."
"Was that before yesterday?"
"...yes. Definitely yes."
I just spent a nearly day with the French cops ( GENDARMERIE) for a few grams of ILLEGAL SUBSTANCE purchased on the public French internet and this was a stressful but an amazing experience about truth, legality, human psychology. There are so much breaches in the system that it looks like a humouristic satyre scene. There is too much to be able to describe these problems here. But the following occurrence will be enough to demonstrate the inefficiency of the French police institutions : during the interrogation implying about 7 policemen for 5 hours, I was able to recover 50% of the seized stupefiant drug ! Their serious negligence will never be revealed by their institution, and will be covered by some twisting of the truth about my interrogation. From this live experience, I am now convince that our police institutions are dangerously disfuntionnal and unreliable. Nevertheless, I must recognise all the unperfect courage and honesty of all these policemen : they try their best in this fuzzy epoch. Peace & love
People would never lie, especially on the internet.
7:20 - The past participle of the verb "to drink" is "drunk". The sentence should thus be "Have you ever drunk wine, beer, or liquor in your own home?" Please take care to use good grammar.
I commend you for your use of good punctuation in remembering to put the comma after "beer".
Namaste good video
Yaay finally a video that's not about crime statistics !
0:39 Oh. Should have read the tags I guess.
This is not what I was expecting lol but tis the most Vsauce moment I've had in a long time hahaha
* 1:53
Google: what makes you think you know you better than we do?