3 ms·

But there's also a matter of probablity: Hanlon's Razor simply captures the fact that stupidity is much easier to come by than malice. So if you have to assume

by mamon 8y ago

But there's also a matter of probablity: Hanlon's Razor simply captures the fact that stupidity is much easier to come by than malice. So if you have to assume something, assume more probable thing.

badrabbit 8y ago
If you must assume sure. My point was to not assume. If you need to know the intentions of the actor to make a decision,keep in mind assuming and knowing are very different. Especially in cases like this where we know so little about the individuals involved,I believe it's better to just say "Scenario X is statistically likely but we should probe for more facts". Of course this specific case is not important to most people,but my point was regarding the accuracy of probability as more unsolved variables as well as yet unknown variables increase. If we knew specific individuals or had some track record behind the specific organization, I say logic like "Hanlon's razor" can be evaluated usefully. If this was a more controversial case (think rodney king murder trial),it would have been more interesting. Since after all, an action is not a crime without criminal intent. Whether malice,negligence or incompetence assumptions can have an adverse impact on all involved parties.
pbhjpbhj 8y ago
>Hanlon's Razor simply captures the fact that stupidity is much easier to come by than malice // Within the context of movie marketing is stupidity more usually the reason for a media megacorps release of media or is marketing more usually the reason? Surely then the probability lies firmly with marketing until evidence shifts that assumption. Razors are not truth generating though they are often treated as if they were.
robbrown451 8y ago
There is also selection bias in play. Most of the things done by stupid marketers we don't hear of, since stupid marketers have lower chance of getting stories in front of us.

by mamon 8y ago

But there's also a matter of probablity: Hanlon's Razor simply captures the fact that stupidity is much easier to come by than malice. So if you have to assume something, assume more probable thing.

badrabbit 8y ago

If you must assume sure. My point was to not assume. If you need to know the intentions of the actor to make a decision,keep in mind assuming and knowing are very different. Especially in cases like this where we know so little about the individuals involved,I believe it's better to just say "Scenario X is statistically likely but we should probe for more facts". Of course this specific case is not important to most people,but my point was regarding the accuracy of probability as more unsolved variables as well as yet unknown variables increase. If we knew specific individuals or had some track record behind the specific organization, I say logic like "Hanlon's razor" can be evaluated usefully. If this was a more controversial case (think rodney king murder trial),it would have been more interesting. Since after all, an action is not a crime without criminal intent. Whether malice,negligence or incompetence assumptions can have an adverse impact on all involved parties.

pbhjpbhj 8y ago

>Hanlon's Razor simply captures the fact that stupidity is much easier to come by than malice // Within the context of movie marketing is stupidity more usually the reason for a media megacorps release of media or is marketing more usually the reason? Surely then the probability lies firmly with marketing until evidence shifts that assumption. Razors are not truth generating though they are often treated as if they were.

robbrown451 8y ago

There is also selection bias in play. Most of the things done by stupid marketers we don't hear of, since stupid marketers have lower chance of getting stories in front of us.