[ogogmad]

You keep making these very negative posts, where you sound very confident, but resort to either word salad or making things up.

> not fucking up your data, modeling your tables correctly, and a SQL query

And getting a pony.

> Of the 10% that can't be solved that way, 90% are solved with data cleaning + a linear model.

87% of statistics are made up.

> Of the 1% that can't be solved either way, 90% are solved with other statistical techniques (timeseries modeling, decision trees and so on).

But why?

This reminds me of how some people in the early '80s sneered at people who did their calculations using computers - recommending instead to memorise a billion mathematical shortcuts that would take longer to learn than programming a computer.

[qsort]

Why do you think this post is "negative"? "Negative" towards what?

> 87% of statistics are made up.

Yes, of course, I didn't mean "lower integer part of nine tenths of the total number of problems". Did that really need to be specified?

>> Of the 1% that can't be solved either way, 90% are solved with other statistical techniques (timeseries modeling, decision trees and so on).

> But why?

Is it really controversial that you should go for the simplest model that works?