6 ms·

This is a completely vapid and entirely generic attack that could be posted, verbatim, in any discussion of any research paper. I'm barely exaggerating with "v

This is a completely vapid and entirely generic attack that could be posted, verbatim, in any discussion of any research paper. I'm barely exaggerating with "verbatim": remove the parenthetical ", and you should probably be wearing a mask" as well as the quote at the end, and read it again. It could be concern-trolling any statistics paper, ever! And what's the point, exactly? Sometimes, results from research later turn out to be wrong, and therefore it is best to completely ignore them? At some point you'll deign enough time to have passed to allow some research to be useful. But until then, you also recommend masks, because..? How is your hunch a better barometer of truth than actual research using real-world data?

noobaccount 6y ago
It’s basically a pull request. There are going to be mistakes and changes. You can pull it and run it yourself if you’d like, but don’t say it’s shipped until it lands on master.
vikramkr 6y ago
And it should be posted in the discussion of any research paper. Especially every preprint. Especially ones of significant public interest. Preprint sites and preprint contain the disclaimer for a reason, and everyone sharing or reporting on them should feel obligated to include a disclaimer like that because people often think science paper = fact proven when that couldn't be further from the truth. Because it's not just that things are "sometimes " proven wrong, but that you have entire fields suffering from reproducibility crises. Including "hard" science fields like oncology.
somewhereoutth 6y ago
Indeed. The first response to anything challenging someone's (imprinted?) worldview is to nit pick on some detail, in order to invalidate the uncomfortable thesis with which they are presented.
- vikramkr 6y ago
  This paper isn't challenging my worldview. It's supporting it. I posted the disclaimer because the paper is a preprint and it's easy to not get that fact when you just look at the title of this post and scroll through the comments.

noobaccount 6y ago

It’s basically a pull request. There are going to be mistakes and changes. You can pull it and run it yourself if you’d like, but don’t say it’s shipped until it lands on master.

vikramkr 6y ago

And it should be posted in the discussion of any research paper. Especially every preprint. Especially ones of significant public interest. Preprint sites and preprint contain the disclaimer for a reason, and everyone sharing or reporting on them should feel obligated to include a disclaimer like that because people often think science paper = fact proven when that couldn't be further from the truth. Because it's not just that things are "sometimes " proven wrong, but that you have entire fields suffering from reproducibility crises. Including "hard" science fields like oncology.

somewhereoutth 6y ago

Indeed. The first response to anything challenging someone's (imprinted?) worldview is to nit pick on some detail, in order to invalidate the uncomfortable thesis with which they are presented.

vikramkr 6y ago
This paper isn't challenging my worldview. It's supporting it. I posted the disclaimer because the paper is a preprint and it's easy to not get that fact when you just look at the title of this post and scroll through the comments.