E[X^2] weights each time with the time, giving the square, and the E[X] in the denominator is the normalisation factor (also required to fix the dimensions).
Say that there are to different waiting times 1s and 3s, and they happen with probability 50% each. The average waiting time (1/2 1+1/2 3) is 2s. However, 75% of the time we are waiting on a 3s event and only 25% on a 1s event. The weighted average is 2.5s. E[X^2]=1/2 1+1/2 9=5(s^2) is not the right answer, it still has to be divided by E[X]=2(s) to get the correct answer.
> I never see the anti immigration folk push for regulating or attacking the companies hiring said immigrants, I am comfortable just assuming it’s racism.
How wouldn't it be just as racist to attack companies for hiring immigrants?
> If you think people who waited more than a decade and paid a hefty sum to affirm their will to be citizens are second-class (or maybe even traitors!)
I don't think so. Do you?
(Edit: I don't object to using 'immigrant' in a different way. But when someone said that in the places with more immigration there will also be more immigrant voters it was pretty clear in what sense the word was being used. Dumbass.)
I don't know about "need" but the 1% population growth of Switzerland is already coming mostly from immigration. (It's also the case in the US, and in the EU it's even worse: without immigration population is declining.)
The vote was not about limiting citizenship. It was about limiting the number of residents - if anything the effect would have been to _reduce_ that permanent underclass with fewer rights.
About one third. That would bring the fraction of naturalised foreign-born citizens in line with the US (which is also a kind-of-hard place to get citizenship, that's true).
> CH has mandatory military service which discourages many males from naturalizing
That doesn't make it difficult, it makes it undesirable and suggests that many people could get it but choose not to.
There are 40k naturalisations each year (a similar number relative to population as in the US). Around 13% of the Swiss citizens have acquired the nationality via naturalisation (8% in the US).
If you were just repeating the commenter’s point about « choosing to pay 10X to 20X because you trust AWS more than Anthropic » what was not the point?
What is the point then of a submission about how you will be required to share data with Anthropic? I’d say that the point is precisely that it’s an issue when you don’t trust them as much as Amazon.
When The One goes rogue, you mean, the distinction is important.