swirl is a software package for the R statistical programming language. Its purpose is to teach users statistics and R simultaneously and interactively. It attempts to do this in the most authentic learning environment possible by guiding users through interactive lessons directly within the R console.
Assuming you installed R on your computer already, install the package (and the other packages it depends on), make a call to swirl(), and you get a guide through the basics.
So Victor and I just had a discussion about which superhero we would be if we could and it quickly escalated into a giant disagreement about who was considered a superhero and who wasn’t. Specifically, we almost went to fist-city over whether Mighty Mouse and Underdog are superheroes. They are. Victor says they aren’t because “they’re crappy”.
me: Underdog is a totally a superhero. He fights crime.
Victor: No one thinks a damn dog is a hero. If you think a dog is your hero you’ve made pretty poor choices in your life.
me: I bet the people he’s saved think he’s a hero.
Victor: No one thinks that dog is a hero. They’re happy they got their stuff back but they don’t want to grow up to be a dog in a cape. And that’s the difference between characters and real superheros.
me: I think anyone can be a superhero. It’s all about intent to solve crime and superhuman abilities.
Victor: What about Garfield? He has super-human abilities.
me: What’s he fighting? Mondays? Lasagna?
Victor: What about Rocky and Bullwinkle?
me: Huh. Dammit.
me: Wait. They fight super villains so I’m gonna say yes. Superheroes.
Victor: Indiana Jones.
me: Um…he’s a hero, but not a superhero. “Super” implies supernatural or superhuman strength.
Victor: He’s immortal.
me: He’s not immortal.
Victor: You haven’t seen him die yet, have you?
me: By that logic, I’m immortal.
Victor: Okay…Batman. No superpowers. Major superhero. BAM.
me: Shit. Well…he has…superhuman wealth?
Victor: So Richie Rich is superhero?
me: His job is not to solve crime.
Victor: He stops robberies all the time.
me: Of his own money. Doesn’t count.
Victor: Captain Caveman?
me: Well…he’s got a cape. Um…yes?
Victor: Fred Flintstone?
me: What superpower does Fred Flintstone have?
Victor: No one else can eat like him.
me: It’s about intent, Victor. Intent to solve crimes that don’t benefit you.
Victor: Casper the Friendly ghost. That guy was always stopping robbers. Not a superhero.
me: Agreed. But his intent wasn’t to go find robbers. His intent was go hit on Wendy and be friendly. Stopping robbers is just a side effect of being nice. Besides, he was already dead so he wasn’t risking anything.
Victor: Scooby doo.
me: Ooh….good one.
me: Well, he solved crimes, but he didn’t want to solve crimes. And I wouldn’t say he’s superhuman. So, no.
Victor: He’s a talking dog who eats sandwiches. Is that normal dog behavior?
me: All dogs eat sandwiches.
Victor: He MAKES sandwiches. But fine…Doctor Who.
me: Ooh. Hmmmmmmmm…no? He’s superhuman and super awesome, but his intent is really just to explore and have fun and then he finds himself having to save the universe while he’s doing it. But he doesn’t purposely go out looking for crime. Although the TARDIS sort of does, but I think still no.
Victor: So Scooby Doo and Doctor Who are the same.
me: Bite your tongue.
Victor: If neither are superheroes then by your logic, the Doctor is one heart and a big sandwich away from Scooby Doo.
Victor: Tony the Tiger? He’s an seven-foot-tall talking tiger who helps kids with nutrition.
me: That’s not a crime.
Victor: When kids don’t have a good breakfast everyone suffers.
Victor: I mean, I don’t think he is either. I’m just showing you all the holes in your logic. Because they’re huge.
Point? I’m not sure which of us is right and now I’m questioning my own sanity for even having this conversation. So help me out and give me your opinion.
I was buying some groceries along with some snacks which included a tube of Pringles, I was in a rather foul mood, so when I saw the cashier take the tube of Pringles that was upright on the conveyor belt, scan it, and try to put it to the next belt sideways I said:
Me: “Put that upright”
Cashier: *putting the tube sideways* “What did you say?”
Me: *Grapping the tube from her hand and slamming it next to the conveyor belt* “I said PUT IT UPRIGHT!”
Me: “When you put this product sideways, the chips inside may roll around, making it impossible to get ANY of them out of the tube intact, I have told this to the cashiers in this store before, how hard can it be to comprehend that if some product is upright before you scan it, it probably should remain that way afterwards?”
Me: “…can I just pay for my purchase sometime this year?”
I paid for my purchase and left, I regretted my actions afterwards, though I still believe the cashiers should pay attention to ‘small’ details such as how the customer has placed the items on the belt, and put them back in same position afterwards, without throwing them in the general direction of the second conveyor belt like some cashiers tend to do.