Hacker News Reader

Comment by wongarsu | Hacker News Reader

By observing multiple people who have done either thing for 10+ years.

Sure, there might be lots of confounding factors, and it might not be causation at all. That's why the quote is from a speech, not a paper

View on HN

Here's another quote, I don't know if it's from a speech or anything:

> What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence.

or you can thoughtfully consider it and maybe learn something

quotes like this are only used to dismiss observations you don't like

The quote makes a statement, we don't know if it is true. What can you learn from that? It might spark some thoughts, maybe.

exactly. maybe you think of it as a smidge more credible because someone else thinks it, even. Especially if they're a generally intelligent person whose other thoughts you like.

Bro, you literally provided zero evidence, learn what?

When someone suggests an idea without evidence there's still a modicum of data in the fact that they believe it. You don't have to, like, suddenly change your mind, but you also don't have to blow it off as unsubstantiated entirely. Probably they believe it, and said it, for a reason. Anyway whether or not you blow it off is entirely an indication of your trust in them, and has nothing to do with whether they presented evidence.

Well Hamming observed it. It's not a randomized controlled study. It's anecdotal of course, and if one observed something to the contrary they would be well served to discount it. But presumably Hamming was there was a reason Hamming was addressing Bellcore.

> Well Hamming observed it.

I observe so many ways to have known and unknown bias in this I call any outcomes cow manure.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com