= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
lessdazed comments on [LINK] Loss of local knowledge affecting intellectual trends - 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 (50)
A strong case does not imply an important effect size.
It is far more likely that today you will be directly affected by the gravity of Pluto than that today you will trip on the sidewalk. A case explaining why I thought you likely to trip today would be weak and full of holes, while my case for gravity is much stronger.
The OP seems to me like a fixation on a very small thing, a story of why a factor should have an effect, totally ignoring most other factors on the effect and most other effects of the factor.
Why is this down voted? It is a decent point.
However I feel obliged to point out that most of the stuff posted on LW/OB written in this style ("saying complex things with simple words) dosen't much bother to deal with effect size.
Edit: Can downvoters of these two posts please explain why this particular comment is wrong? I really can't see it.