I suppose listening to this Podcast you will get some insight into how a scientist views speculative conclusions based on poor data. I think the trap is to think my initial response nails the major problems with a lot of this work. Like the gravity wave doubts: If I had written it I would start out bringing 1969 to the first sentence knowing that people often skim read these things. The boarder AI control seems so flawed from the outset. The tiny study says it has a 69 % hit rate or there about distinguishing between people telling the truth and faking telling lies in a small artificial sample where you have 50 % of the people fake lying. The deployment of this where I would hope it would be down a 1% is just mindbogglingly awful. Then there is the 6 vole study in China, where these cute cuddly creatures are chilled and killed and then used for fecal transplants. The chain of logic is really hard to capture here.
Touching on rehab, I really yawn a lot towards the end and this, may I explain is nothing to do with the articles.
MP4 recording MP3 recording
No comments:
Post a Comment
Your thoughts