3 ms·

If anything, I demonstrated my point quite clearly: The narrative peddlers say the number is significant, I say the number is practically meaningless. If you ar

If anything, I demonstrated my point quite clearly: The narrative peddlers say the number is significant, I say the number is practically meaningless. If you are interested in getting an educated answer, crunch the numbers yourself along with your own life experiences and come to your own conclusions. My own conclusion is that, no, 3 hours a week or 26 minutes a day is not significant. It's a rounding error. >What is relevant is the percent decline in social activity that 26 minutes per day represents. What do we define as "social activity"? Just physical interactions? No phone calls? Voice calls/chats? Video calls? Texting? Email? Instant messaging? Hell, Mysterious Twitter X or Hacker News? My personal take, which you don't need to agree with, is that advances in communication technologies such as the internet have vastly increased my "social activity", because I understand "social activity" to mean any interactions with another human that aren't about business.

skhunted 3y ago
When talking about statistics one can not credibly say, If you are interested in getting an educated answer, crunch the numbers yourself along with your own life experiences and come to your own conclusions…. Anecdotes do not constitute getting an educated answer.
- Dalewyn 3y ago
  If by educated you mean "Following the preachings of powers-that-be.", sure it's not an educated answer, it's a wrongthink answer. But if by educated you mean taking the numbers and crunching them yourself together with your life experiences, values, knowledge, and wisdom you've accrued, then whatever conclusion you draw is an educated answer. See also: "Educated guess." Personally, I've been burned far too many times far too consistently by "journalists", "experts", so-called "scientists", and whoever else with haughty titles that I don't consider them any more than cancerous wastes of my and everyone's time. Grab the raw numbers provided by proper scientists devoid of editorial bullcrap, crunch them yourself, and draw your own educated answer. Statistics can mean anything, don't let others twist them for you.
  - skhunted 3y ago
    “Educated guess” does not mean what your statements imply you think it means.

skhunted 3y ago

When talking about statistics one can not credibly say, If you are interested in getting an educated answer, crunch the numbers yourself along with your own life experiences and come to your own conclusions…. Anecdotes do not constitute getting an educated answer.

Dalewyn 3y ago
If by educated you mean "Following the preachings of powers-that-be.", sure it's not an educated answer, it's a wrongthink answer. But if by educated you mean taking the numbers and crunching them yourself together with your life experiences, values, knowledge, and wisdom you've accrued, then whatever conclusion you draw is an educated answer. See also: "Educated guess." Personally, I've been burned far too many times far too consistently by "journalists", "experts", so-called "scientists", and whoever else with haughty titles that I don't consider them any more than cancerous wastes of my and everyone's time. Grab the raw numbers provided by proper scientists devoid of editorial bullcrap, crunch them yourself, and draw your own educated answer. Statistics can mean anything, don't let others twist them for you.
- skhunted 3y ago
  “Educated guess” does not mean what your statements imply you think it means.