3 ms·
The thing is, it's not everyone in tech. It's once in a while, some single person in tech denounces some service and there are a million articles written about
by dagenix 7y ago
The thing is, it's not everyone in tech. It's once in a while, some single person in tech denounces some service and there are a million articles written about it. It's anecdata, not data. You shouldn't base your decisions on that fact that some single person you never met and have no reason to trust, decided to say some particular thing that was fun to report on.
- remarkEon 7y agoThis is a fair point, but just as everyone is not in tech not everyone has time to read academic studies about the affects of screen use on children. A click-bait article from Gizmodo is a terrible heuristic, sure, but is observing the behavior of people who do work in tech, who have kids, and then calibrating your view of the problem really that bad of one?
- dagenix 7y agoI someone that works in the meat packing industry comes out as a cannibal because he thinks human flesh makes his children grow strong, would you listen to him? Of course not - he's a one off and probably out for attention, but he'll get lots of media coverage. But he isn't worth listening to. Random one off's in tech aren't really any more knowledgable.
- remarkEon 7y agoNo, because a random guy who encourages eating human flesh is an absurdity - never mind that, even if presented with evidence that it did make children grow strong, there are plenty of other reasons to oppose it. Moderating screen time for children is not like this. What I'm talking about is noticing patterns, and positing a hypothesis based on the behavior of those who would be closer to full knowledge of the instrument in question. That seems ... perfectly reasonable.
- dagenix 7y agoI don't know who would be better to judge the benefits of eating human flesh than a canibal. It's not reasonable at all to say that you'll accept anecdata from tech Bros seeking attention.