OT – Statistics fun but we're left out

← Back to Forums


ejwme
Participant
#

http://www.portfolio.com/special-reports/2010/12/01/methodology-of-portfolio-2010-survey-of-smartest-places

Ok, we’ll ignore the fact that they defined “smart” as formal degrees + income. But they claim they included the 200 largest metro areas. Apparently, this includes Burlington, Vermont at 207,600 but not Pittsburgh at (wikipedia sourced) 311,647 [city, or 2,462,571 metro].

By my numbers, Burlington should get off the list and Pittsburgh should be on it (undoubtedly among others). Did I miss something? Or do we not count? I couldn’t find a place to point out there error without signing up for some social media nonsense. So I figured I’d fume here, where the two other statistics geeks could sympathize :D


Mick
Participant
#

Somehow “Pittsburgh” doesn’t turn up in a text search of the document, but it is listed as 86th on the list. I don’t know why a text search misses it.


Lyle
Participant
#

Statistics, nothin. “We took a number, divided it by another number, multiplied it by another number, chopped them all up into bits and dropped them in a blender with some unlabeled things we found in the spice cabinet, and left it on the counter overnight. In the morning, we cooked it. Here Mom, taste it!”


ejwme
Participant
#

d’oh, thank you Mick! Funny it’s just above Binghamton, NY. Guy who sits next to me is from there.

I always figured we weren’t as overeducated as some people claim.


ejwme
Participant
#

but Lyle, when you do that 200 times, that’s a statistic!


dwillen
Participant
#

They used some dumb unicode symbol for the double tt in Pitt. If you search for “PiRsburgh” (or just “burgh”) it finds it.


Lyle
Participant
#

I don’t know what was wrong with ASCII anyway. A couple more years and even the Chinese would have switched to English.

← Back to Forums

You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Click here to login.

Supported by