28 Matching Annotations
  1. Jul 2021
  2. Jun 2021
  3. May 2021
    1. David Benkeser. (2020, November 9). Another view on uncertainty associated based on Pfizer’s results. Even if you were highly skeptical about MRNA vaccines (many are [were?]) with 50% prior belief that VE ~ 0, based on an 8:86 vax:placebo case split, the posterior probability that VE > 75% is ~ 1. Https://t.co/xtBONtGHmT [Tweet]. @biosbenk. https://twitter.com/biosbenk/status/1325856366225993729

  4. Apr 2021
  5. Mar 2021
  6. Feb 2021
    1. The “honest and accurate” science that society expects relies in part on skepticism, the willingness to doubt results and, when possible, to carefully replicate their findings.
    2. But missing from the third edition is skepticism, one of the fundamental elements of doing science.
  7. Jan 2021
    1. I run a fairly ancient RedHat Enterprise 6 on my 32-bit test machine and if I need something requiring Gtk3 (such as a latest Firefox or Chrome), I just make a chroot and use debootstrap (from EPEL) to get me a Debian 9 userland for that program. Easy. No bizarre "app stores", no conflicting packages. Do people use Snap app-stores because they don't know how to use the chroot command? Or are they just lazy? If it is because they want the added security of a container, substitute chroot with lxc... Shouldn't be necessary though; if you avoid non-ethical software (i.e App-stores), you are very unlikely to need the added security.
  8. Sep 2020
  9. Aug 2020
  10. Jul 2020
  11. Jun 2020
    1. In philosophy, empiricism is a theory that states that knowledge comes only or primarily from sensory experience.[1] It is one of several views of epistemology, along with rationalism and skepticism.
  12. May 2020
  13. Apr 2020
    1. Kerckhoffs’ Principle states that you should assume that your adversary knows as much about the system you use as you do. This is why – despite what I may have said on April Fools Day last year – security experts are skeptical of security systems that hide the details of how they operate. They are particularly skeptical of systems that derive their security from keeping the details of how they work secret. I could go on at great length about why openness about the system improves security. Indeed, my first draft of this article did go on at great length.
  14. Jan 2020
    1. Instead of telling people to form beliefs on the basis of evidence, encourage them to seek out something, anything, that could potentially undermine their confidence in a particular belief. (Not something that will, but something that could. Phrased this way it’s less threatening.) This makes thinking critical.

      Concise & well phrased. Seen the concept worded many ways, but this is a favorite.

  15. Jul 2018
    1. To illustrate, consider Isaac Newton.

      But there are examples of where our theory has led us astray, the heliocentric vision of the universe being an example. If not for that attachment to previous thinking, we might have learned more quickly about the heliocentric truth.

      'Even as He hath revealed: "As oft as an Apostle cometh unto you with that which your souls desire not, ye swell with pride, accusing some of being impostors and slaying others."' - Kitab-i-Iqan

  16. Jan 2017
    1. The lady of such a professor, on being questioned by a company of ladies as to her husband's emotions at the prospect of such an enlargement of the field of science, excited a strong feeling of displeasure against herself. She could not say that he believed it, and would gladly have said nothing about it; but her inquisitive companions first cross-examined her, and then were angry at her skepticism

      Angry at Skepticism

      The Great Moon Hoax of 1835 was widely believed (see General Credulity). Similar to today, skeptics were not well liked, and the reaction to them was often anger.

    1. The problem isn’t the fake news itself, as much as the historical consciousness that allows so many to willingly believe it with no skepticism.
  17. Feb 2015
    1. The New York State attorney general’s office accused four major retailers on Monday of selling fraudulent and potentially dangerous herbal supplements and demanded that they remove the products from their shelves.

      As early as the opening, we can see issues with the handling of the subject matter that give ample room to herbal supplement apologists.

      The apologist could start with the semantic objection, "What is an herbal supplement that does not contain the ingredients on the label -- it is just a filler pill." He will go on to establish that this constitutes supplement fraud for sure. But the author seeks to smuggle the idea of danger into the idea of herbal medicine and would not be able to do that if the products were more carefully engineered. In other words, these fraudulent herbal supplements only present dangers because they're fraudulent; if they contained what they were supposed to they would be safe.

      The apologist would be deeply mistaken.

      Sadly, even though this is just one little paragraph, the problems do not stop there. The 4 major retailers targeted by the investigation are being set-up (through the use of that "major" label) as giants in the industry. While this may be true by the numbers, it's also a very easy point for an apologist to knock down. One can almost imagine the smaller scale "herbal remedy" operation -- "Is it really any surprise big corporations fail to provide a quality herbal product? They care about you. They only care about their bottom line."

      Suffice it to say, the handling oo the reporting, as well as the circumstances of the investigation look like they're going to leave much to be desired. If thee early presentation fails persist throughout the article, it would have the effect of turning this should-be exposé into little more than a flash the pan.

      We'll see this is exactly what happens.