3 ms·
As to the researchers probably know what they're doing, see my original comment and the very first thing I said, "I need to know more". It's not charming cute n
by lostcolony 13y ago
As to the researchers probably know what they're doing, see my original comment and the very first thing I said, "I need to know more". It's not charming cute naiveté, I simply really think that the article tells me nothing about the methodology.
See response here as to why they're still yes/no questions (TLDR; the outcomes are yes/no) - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7515824 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7515824
- nzp 13y agoWell, I didn't mean your comment was a case of naivete, because, TBH, the analogy with my layman physics example isn't perfect, but it reminded me, it's a similar thing: people who are or should be aware that they have only superficial info on something, act as though what they know is all there is to it. The point is, we can't possibly come up with a meaningful critique of this research based on the given article, and, I think, the most reasonable course of action in this particular case is to assume the researchers know what they're doing (considering who's involved).