4 ms·
> What kind of discrepancies? Indicating how? What kind of tampering? No idea. Granted. But in the paper's defense, most experimental scientists don't know ho
by ethbro 9y ago
> What kind of discrepancies? Indicating how? What kind of tampering? No idea.
Granted.
But in the paper's defense, most experimental scientists don't know how to use general statistics correctly. So I think it's a fair assumption their average reader would likely be unfamiliar with p-values.
- smsm42 9y agoTrue, but you don't have to write a scientific paper for peer-review here - you can just mention the proof in accessible language, and then refer people that do know what p-values are to place where they can see the data and verify it. Otherwise, the article essentially boils down to "some person is claiming something is wrong with elections, be worried" with no tools to evaluate the claim or make any useful conclusion from it. TBH, that's not a unique occurrence - most of the reporting done in a way that prevents the reader from independently evaluating the information, since the goal of the modern reporting is to get the reader to prearranged conclusion (or prearranged feeling of righteous anger/fear/hate/etc.) and not to give information. This is just another brick in the wall.
- ethbro 9y ago> most of the reporting done in a way that prevents the reader from independently evaluating the information, since the goal of the modern reporting is to get the reader to prearranged conclusion Never ascribe to malice, that which sloth also explains?