4 ms·

This is a pernicious misunderstanding of "frequentism", often found among people who studied statistics mainly by reading comics. http://web.archive.org/web/20

• joshuamorton 9y ago
  That's incredibly unnecessary. My understanding of statistics is not derived from comics (and the first time I heard that example was in a statistics course), and the link you post doesn't actually address what I stated. It addresses an actual mistake in the comic, which is a mistake that I didn't make. Here's Andrew, the author of that blog post: > Yes, I think it makes a lot of sense to criticize particular frequentist or Bayesian methods rather than to criticize freq or Bayes statisticians. Which is exactly what I did. There are times when frequentist methods are effective. I just wouldn't use them to tell me that I have a disease.