Douglas_Knight comments on The Universal Medical Journal Article Error - Less Wrong

6 Post author: PhilGoetz 29 April 2014 05:57PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (189)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Douglas_Knight 06 April 2013 04:47:24PM *  0 points [-]

Why are you not sure of facts that are subject to easy experiments? (update: arundelo is correct)

Comment author: TimS 06 April 2013 05:01:10PM 3 points [-]

Experiment clutters the venue, and being less blunt avoids the appearance of a status conflict.

Comment author: Douglas_Knight 06 April 2013 05:17:32PM 0 points [-]

If deletion is possible, there is very little clutter. If deletion is not possible, and the comment says "I can't figure out how to delete this," at least it discourages other people's experiments. But this thread is itself clutter, so I don't think that is your true rejection. As to bluntness, I conclude that my being less blunt caused you to confabulate bullshit.

PS - I experiment on the open thread.

Comment author: TimS 06 April 2013 05:23:28PM 1 point [-]

As to bluntness, I conclude that my being less blunt caused you to confabulate bullshit.

On reflection, it is probably more accurate for me to say, "I wasn't interested in experimenting, including for concern that the experimenting would look low status, and I have higher preferred ways of acting low status."

As for my own choice not to be blunt, you are not correctly modelling my thought process.

In short, I gave two reasons for my action, and you might be right that one was confabulation, but not the one you identify as confabulation.

Comment author: wedrifid 06 April 2013 05:25:26PM 1 point [-]

Why are you not sure of facts that are subject to easy experiments? (arundelo is wrong)

I have performed the experiment in question and it seems to support arundelo's claim. I am not able to remove this comment. At the very least it demonstrates that the experiment required to prove arundelo's fully general claim is false is not the 'easy' one.

Comment author: TimS 06 April 2013 05:45:08PM *  0 points [-]

Well, now I'm totally confused. Checking Eugine_Nier's account on ibiblio shows that the comment is missing. (Searching for the word "sarcasm" will get you to about when the comment took place, at least as of the date of this comment)

Comment author: wedrifid 06 April 2013 05:55:00PM 1 point [-]

Well, now I'm totally confused. Checking Eugine_Nier's account on ibiblio shows that the comment is missing. (Searching for the word "sarcasm" will get you to about when the comment took place, at least as of the date of this comment)

See my investigation. Short answer: race condition.

Comment author: Douglas_Knight 06 April 2013 05:34:16PM *  0 points [-]

Thanks actually experimenting. My beliefs were two months out of date. I stand by my objection to Tim's comment.