All models are wrong, but some are completely wrong

Re:All models are wrong, but some are completely wrong by guscost on Sunday April 05, 2020 @02:51PM (#22787558)

I don’t think there’s value in doing this, unless the second opinion disagrees with the original model. It’s not hard to find a second “expert” to agree with just about anything, if you look hard enough.

The number of people who agree with something tells you, as a rational person, practically nothing - it reminds me of the absurd compilation argument “One Hundred Authors Against Einstein”: https://archive.org/details/HundertAutorenGegenEinstein/mode...

Einstein’s famous reply: “If I were wrong, then one would have been enough!”

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:All models are wrong, but some are completely wrong by noobermin on Monday April 06, 2020 @04:53AM (#22791931)

An article with just opposing positions would just confuse the reader. It's also like how the media has climate skeptics debate climate scientists one-on-one as if there is an actual debate to be had, magnifying the level of climate skepticism in the field.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:All models are wrong, but some are completely wrong by guscost on Monday April 06, 2020 @11:26AM (#22794547)

I think you missed the point of the story.

[ Parent | on HN ]