4 ms·
> the singular form of evidence is not anecdote It is in Bayesian reasoning.
by travisjungroth 2y ago
> the singular form of evidence is not anecdote
It is in Bayesian reasoning.
- exe34 2y agothat's right, and you don't just update your posterior to match the one dodgy data point at the expense of decades of evidence.
- ruszki 2y agoThat’s right. Did somebody investigate the same thing and had different results? Because in this thread there are only theoretical explanations why it cannot be, and not experiments. So in short, there is only one data point.
- exe34 2y agoWhat conclusions do you believe it is reasonable to draw in light of this? Is your position significantly different from what I said: > either way there's no reason to take anecdotes uncritically. > Because in this thread there are only theoretical explanations why it cannot be No, the explanations are referring to the mountain of evidence based on the physics of the chips and the known characteristics of the chips of the time. That's not theoretical, that past observations.
- ruszki 2y agoShow me those observations. Without that your word is just another anecdote.
- exe34 2y agowhat would you accept as evidence? does it need to be certified by a notary public?
- ruszki 2y agoYou know well that a single study about the temperature response of the given CPU is enough.
- exe34 2y agoThose CPUs can fly. Now you have to show me a single study about the flight response of the given CPU.
- ruszki 2y agoThe logic which you apply here caused several decades and centuries of scientific delays for no good reason.
- exe34 2y agothat's right, we should have been throwing CPUs off a cliff several decades and centuries ago.
- emptiestplace 2y agoTrolling on HN might be one of the stupidest things I've witnessed in a while.