3 ms·
For any given term there is always somebody that will misuse it. Just because a book was written or somebody publishes article is not a proof. I find it useful
by lmilcin 6y ago
For any given term there is always somebody that will misuse it. Just because a book was written or somebody publishes article is not a proof.
I find it useful to have separate terms for when somebody is incompetent (bad science) and when somebody intentionally misleads (quackery).
- kingosticks 6y agoSure, I didn't mean to imply it was proof one way or the other, just that it's not a universal thing. I've actually never heard the term "quackery" but I do like it.
- inimino 6y agoThere's also "pseudoscience". Unfortunately all too common in ML, where the ratio of published papers to genuine new developments is (charitably) at least 2:1.