You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

arundelo comments on Open thread, 14-20 July 2014 - Less Wrong Discussion

3 Post author: David_Gerard 14 July 2014 11:16AM

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

Article Navigation

Comments (144)
Tags: open_thread

Comments (144)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: arundelo 20 July 2014 03:31:39AM *  6 points [-]

Richard Bornat, one of the authors of The camel has two humps (about a supposed bimodal distribution of programming ability) recently wrote:

I did a number of very silly things whilst on the SSRI and some more in the immediate aftermath, amongst them writing "The camel has two humps". I'm fairly sure that I believed, at the time, that there were people who couldn't learn to program and that Dehnadi had proved it. Perhaps I wanted to believe it because it would explain why I'd so often failed to teach them.

Read the rest: Camels and humps: a retraction.

Comment author: ShardPhoenix 20 July 2014 08:02:50AM *  3 points [-]

Title and excerpt aside, this isn't really a retraction of the actual test, just of the author's overly-aggressive interpretation thereof. Basically he says that the test does have some predictive power but not enough to prove anything about who can or can't pass a programming class.

Comment author: Viliam_Bur 20 July 2014 09:27:32AM 2 points [-]

Did someone actually use an ad-hominem argument against themselves to destroy the credibility of their own paper?

Fascinating.

Will this start a new wave of "sorry, I was high when writing the paper, please don't take it seriously" retractions?

:D

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit