ValueBasket.co.nz - Trustworthy?

I'm currently in the market for a new camera and the one I'm looking at is reasonably expensive. While Local retailers do vary a little in price they are all much of a muchness. In my search for a good deal on my camera equipment I turned to the internet and turned up a website that I had never heard of before

Valuebasket.co.nz

Their site appeared well presented and they had a local phone number but I couldn't shake the feeling that something might be up. The difference in price was considerable but believable which kept the too good to be true alarm from going off. With no other signals left I turned to the internet and a deeper investigation of the website itself.

The first thing to understand about Valuebasket.co.nz is that it isn't really a .co.nz at all. While they own the webdomain their contact page makes no real mention of NZ. In fact Valuebasket.co.nz is part of ValueBasket.com, a Hong Kong based company shipping products worldwide from a number of dispatch centres. This is common practice and, while a tad annoying, there's nothing really wrong with doing this. As long as their service is good who cares where the company is based and where the products are coming from right?

Wrong... ish. Given the value of the item that we're talking about it would be great to know that there was a physical location for ValueBasket somewhere in NZ where I could go if something goes wrong. While there is a phone number that's not really enough to satisfy the sceptic in me.

Given that there is nowhere for me to physically go in the event that something goes wrong ValueBasket's online reputation becomes very important. Unfortunately that reputation isn't a good one at the review site below the pie chart of reviews is dangerously red and full of warnings to stay away. While the odd negative review is acceptable 1 star ratings in over 25% of cases is super concerning.

http://www.trustpilot.co.uk/review/valuebasket.com

As a reference point sites that you would expect to score well do so and have far far fewer 1 star reviews

http://www.trustpilot.co.uk/search?query=amazon

D600 real world field test

This is an early field test with the D600. It seems to hold up quite well.
As has been a common theme it is similar in feel and styling to the D7000.
It's looking good for photographers but less good for videographers as apertrure cannot be adjusted while in live view/movie recording.

D600 vs D7000 - Hands on with Matt Granger

As has long been rumoured the D600 appears to be fairly similar to the D7000 in terms of build quality and feel.


http://www.flickr.com/photos/66174868@N02/sets/72157631557088349/

Equivalence Tests - Statistics for Psychology

I'M STILL WORKING THROUGH THIS - IF YOU KNOW WHAT THIS IS ALL ABOUT READ ON AND FEEL FREE TO POINT OUT ERRORS - IF YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT THIS IS ALL ABOUT YOU MAY LIKE TO CHECK BACK LATER

One of the most common misconceptions about p-values is that large p-values show that there is no difference between the conditions that you are comparing. To put it more simply many students interpret a p-value of more than .05 as evidence that the conditions are the same (not different). This is incorrect and reflects an easy fundamental misunderstanding of how p-values are calculated and what influences them. Consider the case where you have two groups that have different mean scores and large standard deviations. In this case the values from each group are highly variable and likely to overlap. Unless you have a large sample size a t-test will be unable to detect this difference; it will return a p-value of greater than .05 even though we know that the true means of the 2 groups are different.

If you want to show that 2 (or more) groups are the same you need to conduct an equivalence test. In an equivalence test your null hypothesis and experimental hypothesis are reversed - your null hypothesis is that the groups are different and your experimental hypothesis is that they are the same. One way to do this is to define two reference points. The first is the point at which you will accept that group 1's score is lower than group 2's. The second is the point at which you will accept that group q's is higher than group 2's. Difference scores falling between these two points allow you to say that the 2 scores are equivalent.

While this sounds straightforward the difficulty comes in setting these two points. While a standard test checks to see if the difference between groups is different to 0 you now have 2 tests checking to see if the difference is greater than and less than some number. Importantly these some numbers do not have a standard definition. You must come up with these points and you must come up with them before running your analysis. Afterall, if you come up with them afterwards what's to stop you picking numbers that will work well for your data set?

While some papers provide example numbers that can provide a useful guideline it is more important to consider why you are running the test and what you are hoping to find. For example if you are comparing 2 drugs for pain relief you might consider a 10% difference in subjective pain relief ratings to be clinically unimportant. This decision would give you your 2 reference points and also highlights an important point about these tests - they are not testing to see whether things are identical, they are testing to see whether or not they are equivalent.

That being said assuming that you wanted to test whether or not two things could be identical one clear item to use to help define your reference points would be your measure of error.

NZ Lottery Scam

Dear Winner,

This notification memo has been sent to you three times without a response from you and this will be the last time and I do hope you receive it. This is to inform you that your winnings dated Saturday, Draw: 1298,Saturday, April 21, 2012 under the NEW ZEALAND LOTTERY promotional lottery draw.

Your e-mail address attached to ticket number: 564756063211- 884 with Serial number: 6312/08 which emerged the New Zealand Jackpot winning number:7 16 31 38 39 40  28 2. Supplementary Strike Numbers: 31 40 38 16. Please check the website below to confirm your  Winning Numbers still remains unclaimed. The expiration date has drawn close. All unclaimed fund after the 180 days expiration date will be rolled over into future draws.

http://lotto.nzpages.co.nz/previous_results.html

You won   $1,000,000.00 in Division 1 NZ LOTTO Promotions

Your inability to attend the award presentation has necessitated this reminder. As a matter of urgency you are required to contact the payment officer with the contact details stated below to be better informed on what is required to lay claims to your winnings.

Peter  Mallory
New Zealand Lottery Corporation UK,
Thames Camp Valley Park,
Reading Berkshire RG61WG, United Kingdom
Tel: + 44-704 571 3624
Tel: + 44-702 409 3871
Tel: + 44-702 406 0898
FAX: + 44-844 774 6162
Email Address:perter_a@aol.com

NOTICE: The information contained in this e-mail may be confidential, legally privileged and protected by law. Access by the intended recipient only is authorized. If you are not the intended recipient, kindly notify the sender immediately. Unauthorized use, copying or dissemination hereof is strictly prohibited. Save for bona fid  departmental purposes, The New Zealand Lotteries Commission does not accept responsibility for the Contents or opinions did not express in this e-mail, nor does it warrant this communication to be free from errors,

Dangers of Motorcycle Riding

The video at the top of the page is a terrifying example of what can go wrong on a motorcycle. It is important  for all motorcyclists to remember that their safety is not only their own hands but also the hands of everyone and everything that they share the road with. In the example above the motorcyclist is in the right legally speaking but when you're arguing with the concrete the law doesn't really help you much. While many people (rightly) point out that the motorcyclist probably could maintained more awareness by not recording a political video for youtube he doesn't have much time or much space to react to the truck crossing his lane. Luckily in this case the rider hasn't been injured too seriously. Even more luckily the accident has been caught on his helmet cam so we can all learn from his riding experience rather than having to learn the same lesson with our own skin.

Restricted Motorcycle Licence - Changes From October 1st

There are a number of changes to the driver licencing system coming into effect on the 1st of October 2012. While some of these have been clearly communicated to the public some have not. There are 2 key changes that will impact novice motorcycle riders they are:

LAMS approved bikes for learner's and restricted licence holders

This is the most effectively communicated change to the licencing scheme. Instead of relying on a cc restriction motorcyclists will now be restricted to bikes with a power-to-weight ratio of less than 150kw per tonne. If the bike is over 250cc it must be LAMS approved and unmodified. If the bike is under 250cc it must not be one of the bikes on the LAMS banned bikes list.

Changes to the Learner licence process

Currently a learner licence can be obtained by sitting a very simple Basic Handling Skills course and passing a theory test at a licencing agent. From the 1st of October the Basic Handling Skills course will include additional elements such as a hazard perception component and the theory test will include more motorcycle specific questions.

Changes to the Restricted licence phase

This is the change that people are least aware of.  Until now riders who were over 25 years old only had to spend 6 months on their restricted licence. After the first of October this will no longer be the case. All riders will have to spend 18 months on their restricted licence. While this can be reduced through competency based training assessments no specific details are currently supplied.

While many will view this change as unfair it is an understandable move when you look at the crash statistics. In order to justify keeping the age split there would need to be a similar split in the crash statisitics (with young people being injured more often). This does not appear to be borne out by the statistics. Instead the greatest number of deaths are now in the 40+ age bracket. While there are a number of potential issues with these stats (discussed in an upcoming post) if you want to focus on reducing the absolute number of road deaths this seems to be an acceptable approach.

Progressing through the licence stages

Progression from a learner licence to a full licence will also move towards CBTA rather than licence tests. While tests will remain as an available option it is unclear how long both avenues will remain open.

Presentation of a stage one CBTA certificate by a learner licence holder applying for a restricted licence will:

• waive the need to complete the learner licence six month minimum time period

• waive the need to sit and pass a practical test at the agent

• waive the need to pay the restricted practical test fee.

Presentation of a stage two CBTA certificate by a restricted licence holder applying for a full licence will:

• reduce the minimum age from 18 years to 17 ½ years

• reduce the restricted licence minimum time period from 18 to 12 months

• waive the need to sit and pass a practical test at the agent

• waive the need to pay the full practical test fee.

http://www.nzta.govt.nz/resources/rules/driver-licensing-amendment-2011-qa.html
http://nzta.govt.nz/licence/getting/motorcycles/cbta.html
http://nzta.govt.nz/licence/getting/motorcycles/time.html

http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showthread.php/152693-18-months-on-your-Restricted-no-matter-your-age-and-Basic-handling-on-November-1st/page2