4 ms·
You're asking people here to put their faith in a comment by some rando (i.e. you) over a well-reputed publication that millions of people have been relying on
by enraged_camel 2y ago
You're asking people here to put their faith in a comment by some rando (i.e. you) over a well-reputed publication that millions of people have been relying on for decades. I think most will balk at the idea, and I'm one of them. No offense.
- Gimpei 2y agoI’ve seen journalists get it wrong enough in my own field that I don’t trust any sensational headline anymore. The world is complicated and you need specialization to make any sense of specific domain. Journalists are mostly professional dilettantes and I don’t trust them in any halfway technical field. I’ve been burned too many times.
- ted_dunning 2y agoThe critique was valid on its face. Measuring extremely small quantities is difficult and results should be given with error bars. The critique of the threshold was also clear. We don't need to know exactly where this person got their degree to understand this.
- topato 2y agoI had to triple check you were referring to Consumer Reports. Truly a prestigious publication /s
- NavinF 2y agoI'd bet on the anon 100% of the time. "well-reputed publications" play games with numbers instead of reporting ppm all the time
- cdman 2y agoWorth reading up upon: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gell-Mann_amnesia_effect#Gell-Mann_amnesia_effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gell-Mann_amnesia_effect#Gell-...