4 ms·

Note: This is a reaction to the headline, which has an obvious statistical problem and therefore smells dishonest. It's not a reaction to the story, which has

Note: This is a reaction to the headline, which has an obvious statistical problem and therefore smells dishonest. It's not a reaction to the story, which has value in it's own right.

dhbradshaw 7y ago
To decompress a little, I feel strongly about this particular careless pattern of thought because it can have real negative consequences. In particular, when you apply it to a doctor or a clinic it gives them strong incentive to reject those who need help the most. They'll have great stats if they only accept people who are fine anyway. But the people who needed a boost will be left to die on their own. This then becomes an argument for avoiding applying metrics to doctors or at all, which is dangerous in and of itself. In order to improve, any person or institution needs feedback. In order to make informed decisions, people need useful data. Sloppy statistics block that. Charging those statistics emotionally only makes it worse.
freddie_mercury 7y ago
The internet doesn't need more hot take reactions to headlines. The internet needs more people who read articles and comment on their actual content. What's more, simply by reacting to the headline as you've done, you've validated their choice of headlines. Journalists are more worried about apathy to an article than anything else. Any engagement is preferable to no engagement. Finally, complaining about headlines on HN is not effective. It is essentially preaching to the choir and little more than virtue & identity signalling on HN at this point, since it happens on every single mainstream article that HN discusses. If you believe that headlines of this type are pernicious then your time & energy will do far more good talking about them in other contexts. For instance, with your family over dinner or with friends while pursuing a mutual hobby together.
- dhbradshaw 7y ago
  Agreed. However, it also needs fewer headlines designed to invoke visceral reactions based on bad statistics.
  - gus_massa 7y ago
    As a general recommendation, try to avoid oneliners in HN. It's better to explain why the headline is wrong and why the article is interesting anyway. Sometimes you can pick the subtitle or a sentence of the article and propose it as an alternative title, and the mods may change it. Sometimes the only sensible title can create be made out of thin air, but the chance that the change is accepted is minimal.

Note: This is a reaction to the headline, which has an obvious statistical problem and therefore smells dishonest. It's not a reaction to the story, which has value in it's own right.

dhbradshaw 7y ago

To decompress a little, I feel strongly about this particular careless pattern of thought because it can have real negative consequences. In particular, when you apply it to a doctor or a clinic it gives them strong incentive to reject those who need help the most. They'll have great stats if they only accept people who are fine anyway. But the people who needed a boost will be left to die on their own. This then becomes an argument for avoiding applying metrics to doctors or at all, which is dangerous in and of itself. In order to improve, any person or institution needs feedback. In order to make informed decisions, people need useful data. Sloppy statistics block that. Charging those statistics emotionally only makes it worse.

freddie_mercury 7y ago

The internet doesn't need more hot take reactions to headlines. The internet needs more people who read articles and comment on their actual content. What's more, simply by reacting to the headline as you've done, you've validated their choice of headlines. Journalists are more worried about apathy to an article than anything else. Any engagement is preferable to no engagement. Finally, complaining about headlines on HN is not effective. It is essentially preaching to the choir and little more than virtue & identity signalling on HN at this point, since it happens on every single mainstream article that HN discusses. If you believe that headlines of this type are pernicious then your time & energy will do far more good talking about them in other contexts. For instance, with your family over dinner or with friends while pursuing a mutual hobby together.

dhbradshaw 7y ago
Agreed. However, it also needs fewer headlines designed to invoke visceral reactions based on bad statistics.
- gus_massa 7y ago
  As a general recommendation, try to avoid oneliners in HN. It's better to explain why the headline is wrong and why the article is interesting anyway. Sometimes you can pick the subtitle or a sentence of the article and propose it as an alternative title, and the mods may change it. Sometimes the only sensible title can create be made out of thin air, but the chance that the change is accepted is minimal.