= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
FAWS comments on Existential Risk and Public Relations - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (613)
I should have said "a set of observations" and "sets of observations". I meant things like that if you and other groups test lots of slightly different bogus hypotheses 5% of them will be "confirmed" with statistically significant relations.
Got it, and agreed. This is one of the most pernicious forms of dishonesty by professional researchers (lying about how many hypotheses were generated), and is far more common than merely faking everything.