2 ms·

This implies a lack of rigorous training. In the physical sciences, one wouldn't become an applied scientist without conducting an experiment to test a phenomen

This implies a lack of rigorous training. In the physical sciences, one wouldn't become an applied scientist without conducting an experiment to test a phenomenon, and the teeth gnashing that goes with making that experiment work. Those who have been fed pristine data without having to undergo the trials and tribulations of actually having to collect the data have missed a crucial part of scientific training. Like you, I find this lack of rigour is rather common among data scientists. Not all, but quite a few.

dgb23 6y ago
That's what I was wondering reading this thread. Much of science is dirty work in other fields and I think that is a good thing. How ridiculous to assume that a scientist doesn't clean their tools and set up their experiments. (Surely as one gets more experienced and older, the job likely becomes less manual, more about teaching and coordinating.)