3 ms·
I'm surprised someone takes my github saved games seriously. It certainly wasn't me. I think this science project would be more fun if assumptions were discard
by 6510 7y ago
I'm surprised someone takes my github saved games seriously. It certainly wasn't me.
I think this science project would be more fun if assumptions were discarded. Just gather the data, do it without a hypothesis. Something interesting might come up worthy of one.
I liked the bit of crankology in the article. If you sound like a crank no one will take you seriously? I had one day pondered what if the cranks are right? How would we know? It follows that we can't know sounding crank equals being wrong and that our idea of "sounding serious" is based on a flawed data set, if it isn't noise entirely. The topic of the study here certainly doesn't inspire my confidence.
- nxpnsv 7y agoSuch post hoc hypothesis trawling essentially is p hacking. Try a large enough set of explanations and your data will show something significant. Might be hard to replicate.
- hwayne 7y agoOne of my favorite examples is this tour de force on "proving" that chocolate helps with weight loss: https://io9.gizmodo.com/i-fooled-millions-into-thinking-chocolate-helps-weight-1707251800 https://io9.gizmodo.com/i-fooled-millions-into-thinking-choc...
- nxpnsv 7y agoor the forever classic: https://www.xkcd.com/882/ https://www.xkcd.com/882/
- 6510 7y agoReplication would indeed be necessary. Objectivity is the stuff to make the science!