2016-08-11

jIyajbe writes:
From Electoral-Vote.com: "A theory has been circulating that the Donald Trump tweets that come from an Android device are from the candidate himself, while the ones that come from an iPhone are the work of his staff. David Robinson, a data scientist who works for Stack Overflow, decided to test the theory. His conclusion: It's absolutely correct. Robinson used some very sophisticated algorithms to analyze roughly 1,400 tweets from Trump's timeline, and demonstrated conclusively that the iPhone tweets are substantively different than the Android tweets. The former tend to come later at night, and are vastly more likely to incorporate hashtags, images, and links. The latter tend to come in the morning, and are much more likely to be copied and pasted from other people's tweets. In terms of word choice, the iPhone tweets tend to be more neutral, with their three most-used phrases being 'join,' '#trump2016,' and '#makeamericagreatagain.' The Android tweets tend to be more emotionally charged, with their three most-used phrases being 'badly,' 'crazy,' and 'weak.'"
reifman adds:
In an excellent forensic text analysis of Trump's tweets with the Twitter API, data geek David Robinson demonstrates Trump authors his angriest, picture-less, hashtag-less Android tweets often in the morning, while staff tweet from an iPhone with pictures, hashtags and greater joy mostly in the middle of the day. Robinson's report was inspired by a tweet by artist Todd Vaziri. As for
why Robinson decided to look into Trump's tweets, he told TIME, "For me it's more about finding a really interesting story, a case where people suspect something, but don't have the data to back it up. For me it was much more about putting some quantitive details to this story that has been going around than it was about proving something about Trump's campaign."

Re:Thanks Media

By quantaman



2016-Aug-11 22:35

• Score: 4, Funny
• Thread

Imagine if any journalist put as much effort into ANYTHING Hillary Clinton does. What's up with the thousands of work-related emails she didn't turn over? Who's gullible enough to believe she installed a private server to send pictures of her grandkids? Why do many of the most repressive dictatorships in the world keep giving so much money to the Clinton foundation?

The only answer you ever get to any of these questions is "Shut up you can't prove anything" which is true, but the same can be said of Al Capone and OJ Simpson. We're just expected to take the word of a politician with countless lies already under her belt.

If only someone could find a major News network that would obsessively look for dirt on the Clintons for 20+ years.

Am I the only one

By quantaman



2016-Aug-11 22:53

• Score: 3, Funny
• Thread

who suddenly feels embarrassed to be using an Android?

Re:Am I the only one

By 93 Escort Wagon



2016-Aug-12 00:00

• Score: 5, Interesting
• Thread

What the fuck is going on in this thread?

It's been apparent for quite some time now there's a group effort to attempt burying these "Trump made an ass of himself again" stories under a mountain of garbage posts. I assume the goal is to make Slashdotters (the ones who aren't sociopathic, anyway) annoyed enough to quickly move on from the thread.

Re:I wish they could do that for news...

By Darinbob



2016-Aug-12 00:34

• Score: 4, Insightful
• Thread

Facts have an anti-Trump bias.

More Interested in His Code

By jIyajbe



2016-Aug-12 02:20

• Score: 3
• Thread

I'm one of the two submitters. I submitted this story because I am intrigued by his methodology, and not because of the political angle.

In my submission, I included a reference to the fact that he coded up his analysis in R, and that his code is right there on his website for all of us to inspect. I was hoping that that was what would catch Slashdotters' eyes. The editor deleted that part, unfortunately; oh, well.

I know a little about statistical analysis, a little bit about coding, but nothing about R. Can anyone knowledgeable about R comment on his code, and/or his analysis? Thanks!

Show more