3 ms·
The "average HN user" doesn't bother me because the adjective "average" isn't describing rigorous mathematics. It's just a rhetorical phrase. What people are
by jasode 5y ago
The "average HN user" doesn't bother me because the adjective "average" isn't describing rigorous mathematics. It's just a rhetorical phrase.
What people are trying to roughly communicate is something much more wordy and convoluted such as... "a large percentage of HN users compared to normal percentage of random sampling of general population ..."
Constant defensive writing with endless disclaimers like the above would just exhaust readers. The tone also comes across as academic and pompous. Casual writing just substitutes all that with the more accessible (but non-mathematical) word "average".
E.g. the current HN front page has headline "PHP in 2022" and the average HN user interprets it to be about the programming language and not Primary Health Properties, a UK real estate investment trust.
We could try to substitute "typical" so we get "typical HN user" but that has the same criticism that there is no such thing as a typical HN user. True... but we can also just accept that people are just trying to communicate in a friendly way that's also concise without lawyers nitpicking the precision of every word.
- NoboruWataya 5y ago> but we can also just accept that people are just trying to communicate in a friendly way that's also concise without lawyers nitpicking the precision of every word. As a lawyer I feel compelled to point out that whenever I see nit-picking like this (outside the context of my job, obviously), it's usually from someone with a STEM background. In my experience lawyers tend to leave the pedantry and nit-picking in the office where at least they are paid to do it. (Okay, I guess you could call this post a nit-pick, if you wanted...)