3 ms·
With the extraordinary claims, the extraordinary evidence usually needs to directly pertain to the claims. It is not "extraordinary claims require other simila
by fastball 6y ago
With the extraordinary claims, the extraordinary evidence usually needs to directly pertain to the claims.
It is not "extraordinary claims require other similar extraordinary things to have happened in the past". That is not evidence for your claim.
- ceejayoz 6y agoExtraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, yes. The point is that "corporations will monetize data" isn't an extraordinary claim.
- fastball 6y agoNo, that is an ordinary claim, and one that has plenty of ordinary evidence to back it up. This company will monetize this data is also an ordinary claim (from history), but similarly needs evidence. "Companies have monetized similar in the past" is not evidence they'll do it in this case. If you're a gambler, you should absolutely use that fact to inform your betting, but it's not evidence.
- ceejayoz 6y agoI'm not a fan of "regulators must allow actual harm before intervening" here.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]