Take that anti-cynical perspective back to Reddit thank you, here in Hacker News we have no time for such leniency. === On a serious note, I enjoyed reading i

Take that anti-cynical perspective back to Reddit thank you, here in Hacker News we have no time for such leniency. === On a serious note, I enjoyed reading it. I think it's clear(ish?) that the approach taken by the author leaves a little to be desired, he seems to be modest and quite aware of this. It's no different to Myth Busters really. They use the scientific process and rarely express them selves past a sample size of one. But for the purpose of advocating science and it's methods, I think it's good. If it's not well... I'll leave you all to stick to reading Journals?