3 ms·

Thank you, in parallel to this response I looked at the paper in more detail and updated the original comment. A shame, I was briefly optimistic about the news.

by nmca 7y ago

cycrutchfield 7y ago
There is a strong desire by many (particularly on HN) to find any sort of evidence to support the contrarian notion that "Hey, it's not that big of a deal, everybody else is just overreacting!" We should be conscious of this desire, and be careful assessing new evidence that comports with this notion.
- nostrebored 7y ago
  This is a pretty insane take. Asking exploratory questions is not contrarian, it's scientific. Beyond that, HN has been oscillating between doomsdaying about CoV19 and calling it no big deal for weeks now. But this isn't a bad thing -- having strong opinions and questioning the veracity of data is key to having informed, strong opinions.
  - cycrutchfield 7y ago
    Nothing scientific about misreading a scientific paper and drawing conclusions that aren't there. HN has a well-known contrarian bias that tends to manifest as a "we know better than the so-called experts" hivemind.
    - nostrebored 7y ago
      To misread a scientific paper you have to actually read it. Data analysis is a difficult field, and there are a number of studies where the data presented tells a completely different story than the scientists presenting it. Science is political and scientists are fallible. Confirmation bias isn't a plebian problem. Reading for your own understanding and asking questions is a necessary part of both scientific accountability and personal growth! And, hearteningly, we see that OP has edited his comment to reflect the knowledge you passed along and has a better understanding of the situation. Inquiry at work.
      - cycrutchfield 7y ago
        Great. This is then one success story among many stories of failure to understand the scientific literature. Even now there is another story on the front page of HN where armchair epidemiologists are proclaiming in the comment section that this is no worse than H1N1. This shit is exhausting.

Thank you, in parallel to this response I looked at the paper in more detail and updated the original comment. A shame, I was briefly optimistic about the news.

by nmca 7y ago

Thank you, in parallel to this response I looked at the paper in more detail and updated the original comment. A shame, I was briefly optimistic about the news.

cycrutchfield 7y ago

There is a strong desire by many (particularly on HN) to find any sort of evidence to support the contrarian notion that "Hey, it's not that big of a deal, everybody else is just overreacting!" We should be conscious of this desire, and be careful assessing new evidence that comports with this notion.

nostrebored 7y ago
This is a pretty insane take. Asking exploratory questions is not contrarian, it's scientific. Beyond that, HN has been oscillating between doomsdaying about CoV19 and calling it no big deal for weeks now. But this isn't a bad thing -- having strong opinions and questioning the veracity of data is key to having informed, strong opinions.
- cycrutchfield 7y ago
  Nothing scientific about misreading a scientific paper and drawing conclusions that aren't there. HN has a well-known contrarian bias that tends to manifest as a "we know better than the so-called experts" hivemind.
  - nostrebored 7y ago
    To misread a scientific paper you have to actually read it. Data analysis is a difficult field, and there are a number of studies where the data presented tells a completely different story than the scientists presenting it. Science is political and scientists are fallible. Confirmation bias isn't a plebian problem. Reading for your own understanding and asking questions is a necessary part of both scientific accountability and personal growth! And, hearteningly, we see that OP has edited his comment to reflect the knowledge you passed along and has a better understanding of the situation. Inquiry at work.
    - cycrutchfield 7y ago
      Great. This is then one success story among many stories of failure to understand the scientific literature. Even now there is another story on the front page of HN where armchair epidemiologists are proclaiming in the comment section that this is no worse than H1N1. This shit is exhausting.