3 ms·

It seems like you're trying to discredit Nate Silver by how bad his PR people are. I assume everything is PR so I can focus on merits. Are you interested in mer

by mkr-hn 14y ago

It seems like you're trying to discredit Nate Silver by how bad his PR people are. I assume everything is PR so I can focus on merits. Are you interested in merits or taking shots at something you've (apparently) given no thought to? It's not like 2012 is the first time he's used this methodology. I've been following 538 since it launched in 2008 and generally find it to be insightful and informative. And more right than wrong. And when he's wrong, he usually has a good post to talk about how he got it wrong, and how the miss will factor into future projections.

001sky 14y ago
Whatever. Ad hominem attacks are actually useful when people try to dress up their politics as "science" or "objectivity". Try reading Nietzche. Nothing is new here. The purpose of his analytics are propoganda, plain and simple. The notion that an election will be an "independent test" of a pollster's predictions the goal they are all <trying to be avoid>. That is why campaigns employ them, to test their messages, react, change message (as appropriate) and influence the public mood, etc.
- mkr-hn 14y ago
  What you're saying is you don't care. You can just say that. "I don't care to look further to see if this person's work has merit." That's ok. But don't try to dress it up as some kind of cynical enlightenment.
  - 001sky 14y ago
    No, i don't care to argue with you.
    - mkr-hn 14y ago
      This string of posts says otherwise. I think it annoys you that I won't go along with your desired narrative. Your submission history combined with the rapid rise in karma makes me think you're the one doing thinly-veiled PR. edit: One of your first submissions is from Andrew Breitbart's site. And you're calling others partisan. Who are you working for?
      - 001sky 14y ago
        Nah. You're not adding any information or insight with your back and forth. That's what you miss. You might also be more interested in the PhD thesis I submitted on multi-touch user interfaces, adjacent. or: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4707742 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4707742 http://flowingdata.com/2009/02/25/googles-chief-economist-hal-varian-on-statistics-and-data/ http://flowingdata.com/2009/02/25/googles-chief-economist-ha... But nice try at the smear. Orthogonal Datapoint: S&P guilty of misleading investors Landmark ruling by Australian court could pave way for flood of cases against ratings agencies http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2012/nov/05/standard-poors-guilty-misleading-investors http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2012/nov/05/standard-poor... http://www.cnn.com/2012/11/05/business/sp-guilt-misleading-investors/ http://www.cnn.com/2012/11/05/business/sp-guilt-misleading-i... Dressing up ideas with statistics is not new, original, or scientific, etc. Its just an informed, iterative marketing strategy. In business or politics. The level (AAA!) and quality of the "analysis" notwithstanding.[1] _______ [1] Its worth noting the ~epistemological assymetry of ratings. They are so "objective" and "reliable" that their use is legally mandated, in the US and the EU. But the providers ratings themselves issue them as "non-expert" "public opinions". Thus, they cannot be sued if you rely on them. We'll see how far the Australian precedent goes, internationally. Until then, Caveat Emptor.
        deleted 14y ago
        [deleted]
        deleted 14y ago
        [deleted]
checkinitout 14y ago
He wasn't trying to discredit anyone. The point is that there's something of a media frenzy about Silver right now, but I think he's saying there's something that doesn't feel right about it, and I agree. Silver does good work, but let's be real - all he does is aggregate existing poll data, and give more weight to pollsters who call cell phones as well as land lines. It's the ground-level pollsters who are geniuses, Silver is just aggregating their work. Smart, but hardly rocket science. If there's any real genius involved, I'd say it's in the PR campaign that's promoting Silver right now. It's clearly effective and well done.

by mkr-hn 14y ago

001sky 14y ago

Whatever. Ad hominem attacks are actually useful when people try to dress up their politics as "science" or "objectivity". Try reading Nietzche. Nothing is new here. The purpose of his analytics are propoganda, plain and simple. The notion that an election will be an "independent test" of a pollster's predictions the goal they are all <trying to be avoid>. That is why campaigns employ them, to test their messages, react, change message (as appropriate) and influence the public mood, etc.

mkr-hn 14y ago
What you're saying is you don't care. You can just say that. "I don't care to look further to see if this person's work has merit." That's ok. But don't try to dress it up as some kind of cynical enlightenment.
- 001sky 14y ago
  No, i don't care to argue with you.
  - mkr-hn 14y ago
    This string of posts says otherwise. I think it annoys you that I won't go along with your desired narrative. Your submission history combined with the rapid rise in karma makes me think you're the one doing thinly-veiled PR. edit: One of your first submissions is from Andrew Breitbart's site. And you're calling others partisan. Who are you working for?
    - 001sky 14y ago
      Nah. You're not adding any information or insight with your back and forth. That's what you miss. You might also be more interested in the PhD thesis I submitted on multi-touch user interfaces, adjacent. or: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4707742 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4707742 http://flowingdata.com/2009/02/25/googles-chief-economist-hal-varian-on-statistics-and-data/ http://flowingdata.com/2009/02/25/googles-chief-economist-ha... But nice try at the smear. Orthogonal Datapoint: S&P guilty of misleading investors Landmark ruling by Australian court could pave way for flood of cases against ratings agencies http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2012/nov/05/standard-poors-guilty-misleading-investors http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2012/nov/05/standard-poor... http://www.cnn.com/2012/11/05/business/sp-guilt-misleading-investors/ http://www.cnn.com/2012/11/05/business/sp-guilt-misleading-i... Dressing up ideas with statistics is not new, original, or scientific, etc. Its just an informed, iterative marketing strategy. In business or politics. The level (AAA!) and quality of the "analysis" notwithstanding.[1] _______ [1] Its worth noting the ~epistemological assymetry of ratings. They are so "objective" and "reliable" that their use is legally mandated, in the US and the EU. But the providers ratings themselves issue them as "non-expert" "public opinions". Thus, they cannot be sued if you rely on them. We'll see how far the Australian precedent goes, internationally. Until then, Caveat Emptor.
      - deleted 14y ago
        [deleted]
      - deleted 14y ago
        [deleted]

checkinitout 14y ago

He wasn't trying to discredit anyone. The point is that there's something of a media frenzy about Silver right now, but I think he's saying there's something that doesn't feel right about it, and I agree. Silver does good work, but let's be real - all he does is aggregate existing poll data, and give more weight to pollsters who call cell phones as well as land lines. It's the ground-level pollsters who are geniuses, Silver is just aggregating their work. Smart, but hardly rocket science. If there's any real genius involved, I'd say it's in the PR campaign that's promoting Silver right now. It's clearly effective and well done.