4 ms·
Is this terrible? The idea is not do do science. The idea is to loosely systematize and conceptualize innovation. To generate options and create a failure tole
by netcan 1y ago
Is this terrible?
The idea is not do do science. The idea is to loosely systematize and conceptualize innovation. To generate options and create a failure tolerant system.
I'm sure improvements could be made... but this isn't about being a valid or invalid expirement.
- zeroCalories 1y agoIt seems bad to me because you're giving yourself the illusion of effect.
- godelski 1y ago> The idea is not do do science. The idea is to loosely systematize and conceptualize innovation. Why are you acting like these are completely different frameworks? You have the same goals
- Rastonbury 1y agoThe standard for science a much higher ie. publishing a effect when it arose by chance as an academic When you A/B test generally mistakes are reversible and will not make your company bankrupt or lose your job. Something being a 1 in 20 fluke is acceptable risk, you'll get most decisions right. Compare this however to hairy decisions on entering a new market or creating a new product line, there are no A/B tests or scientific frameworks here, you gather all the evidence you can, estimate the risk and make a decision