This is an important debate! Only one form of communication can be declared "the most powerful, useful, effective communication technology ever!!"
134 karma · joined August 3, 2012
That's similar in spirit to scientific method: Formulate a hypothesis and then set out to disprove it. (Overly simplified, of course.)
So, there's definitely something here. But in my experience, the phrase "Strong Opinions, Weakly Held" is mostly just used to excuse bad behaviors.
In February, the NY Times writes, "The Justice Department charged 13 Russians and three companies on Friday in a sprawling indictment that unveiled a sophisticated network designed to subvert the 2016 election" [1]
OK, so Russia had this expensive, sophisticated operation to influence the election. It wasn't a half-assed effort.
So why wouldn't this operation include attacking voting machines? Especially if the machines are vulnerable and virtually unprotected?
[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/16/us/politics/russians-indi...
Anyway, if anyone knows the answer, I'd like to know as well. And to be clear: I have no opinion about how things should be in this case, I just want to know how they are.
But the article sure makes it sound like hospitals are hiding MRSA-related deaths, since MRSA infections are often "hospital acquired". And we all agree that hospitals would have an incentive to hide these numbers.
And the apparent under-reporting seems to indicate that this is in fact what's going on. This sounds like a problem! Thanks a lot, dishonest hospitals!
Then you agree with the article that "the motive to hide hospital-acquired infections is clear".
Uhh... That's kind of a huge problem.
I agree with the grandparent post that "Goldman's position in the crash truly had nothing at all to do with superior risk management systems and was a mixture of political favors and luck"
The snake oil in this case is what p4wnc6 (who's spot on) highlighted: "The team within Goldman that had architected and developed this years ago had spun out into a consulting group that essentially reimplemented the same thing" [at other banks].
The product that they sold (a SecDB clone) is pure snake oil, and the projects (which were massively expensive) delivered very little value.
Consider: If SecDB really lives up to the hype, then why would Goldman let all these other banks steal Goldman developers and straight-up copy it?
[1] http://news.efinancialcareers.com/us-en/253040/three-bank-of...
I completely agree with the parent and grandparent posts! I worked with one of the SecDB clones for three years at a Too Big To Fail bank, and it was criminally bad (imho). It's snake oil.
Maybe people choose the cake because they think, "Phew! I did something difficult! I deserve some cake!" And the people who only memorized two numbers think, "Well, I didn't do anything that warrants cake. I'll just take the salad."
I don't mean to propose this as an alternate explanation -- it just seems like there could be a million explanations for why people are more likely to choose the cake. (But maybe the researchers found ways to rule them out?)
Another random question -- have people replicated this experiment? Just curious.
"Valve's statements about Windows 8 usability were mirrored by Blizzard."
Might Blizzard not feel similarly threatened by Windows 8?
"So It's an OpenGL vs Direct3D debate"
I slightly misspoke, but the example still holds: an attack on Direct3D is an attack on Microsoft. (Do I need to back that up? Could anyone conceivably disagree?)
"All this noise is branding/promotion of the Valve brand, and would likely be going on even without Windows 8."
Good point, and I agree. But what would it be like if Windows wasn't pushing an app store? Would they still be calling their main platform a "catastrophe"? (Maybe, maybe not.)
So I guess I should have asked, "How much does Valve fear a Windows app store?" And also, "Doesn't it kinda seem like Valve is attacking Microsoft?"
Sometimes it seems like "Hooray for Valve/Steam/Gabe" are three of the internet's favorite topics. I get the impression that the Venn diagram of people who love memes and people who love Valve probably looks like a circle.
How does Valve manage to get so much love from the internet? Sometimes I think they must have a small team dedicated to feeding social news sites. For example, "Hey look guys, a new Team Fortress comic!" Or, "Here's some fancy talk about how enlightened we are! P.S.: Give us your money."
Aren't there better-loved companies that receive much less internet-love?
According to the internet, Valve is not just a company, it's a hero. And Valve clearly feeds this idea. For example, this very article. Valve doesn't just want your money, it wants your love.
Is this dangerous? Is this effective? How much does internet-love translate to real dollars?
There seems to be a lot of noise about Valve these days. Some examples: the "Windows 8 is going to be a catastrophe" thing; the "we're hiring super elite Linux developers" thing; the "our engine is faster on Linux?!" thing; and now this navel-gazing self-congratulatory gobbledygook.
Sudden Clarity Clarence asks, "Is Windows 8 going to have an app store? Could that be a threat to Steam? Is all this noise just saber-rattling?"