4 ms·

Uniqueness is not a requirement =) I still think you are over-generalising from experience in the software world. Science is about sense-making, finding parsimo

Uniqueness is not a requirement =) I still think you are over-generalising from experience in the software world. Science is about sense-making, finding parsimonious ontologies to describe the world. Software is about building reliable automation for various purposes. They have orthogonal goals; why would you believe that automated testing would work the same way in both domains? I just don't see it. Maybe you can elaborate on what you mean by automated testing of scientific hypotheses? I get the feeling we are talking past each other because we're both repeating the same points. Maybe we should focus on the 25% of excuses you've agreed are valid!

austin-cheney 2y ago
> I just don't see it. That’s because you haven’t tried. You only test what you know, what’s provable. The goal isn’t 100% validation of everything. The only goal is error identification. Surely you know something in science, like the distance to Proxima Centauri. Start with what you know. Then when something new comes along the only goal is to see which of those known things are challenged. Testing doesn’t buy certainty. It’s more like insurance, because it successfully lowers risks in much shorter time. Like with insurance there aren’t wild expectations it’s going to prevent a house fire, but it will prevent unexpected homelessness.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]