Randall Munroe Responds to Gelman's Criticism of XKCD

Re:Randall Munroe Responds to Gelman's Criticism of XKCD by bashzor on Sunday November 11, 2012 @07:18PM (#4771087)

I love this line.

The truth is, I genuinely didn’t realize Frequentists and Bayesians were actual camps of people—all of whom are now emailing me.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Randall Munroe Responds to Gelman's Criticism of XKCD by saraid216 on Monday November 12, 2012 @03:50AM (#4772073)

Tribalism is so cute when it's not political.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Randall Munroe Responds to Gelman's Criticism of XKCD by hessenwolf on Monday November 12, 2012 @05:02AM (#4772217)

I once saw David Cox interrupt an argument between the two camps at a conf to say something along the lines of Frequentist/Bayesian, whatever gets the job done for the problem at hand. I can't do it justice, but it was very dudely.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Randall Munroe Responds to Gelman's Criticism of XKCD by lloeki on Monday November 12, 2012 @04:18PM (#4774843)

It sounds like Randall got bitten by some variant of Poe's law.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Randall Munroe Responds to Gelman's Criticism of XKCD by noonespecial on Sunday November 11, 2012 @10:34PM (#4771472)

He should be doubly cautious of Rule 34 in this case.

http://xkcd.com/305/

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Randall Munroe Responds to Gelman's Criticism of XKCD by anonymfus on Monday November 12, 2012 @06:02AM (#4772337)

How viewer must recognize who are Frequentists and Bayesian in porn? Of course it possible to place tattoos with formulas on bodies or put some blackboards in background (conventional plot about student and teacher?), but can it be more elegant? May be some joke about contraception?

[ Parent | on HN ]