←back to thread

228 points curmudgeon22 | 6 comments | | HN request time: 0.585s | source | bottom
1. ve55 ◴[] No.26612423[source]
My favorite thing about 'study finds' articles on HN is that I get to read the comments and see people instantly tell me why the article (or sometimes paper as well) is terrible.

I mean this sincerely too, since it's a very low-effort and quick way to find what is often some pretty critical flaws in the presented conclusions.

replies(5): >>26612611 #>>26612707 #>>26612791 #>>26613123 #>>26619935 #
2. kevinyun ◴[] No.26612611[source]
I appreciate this on the S1 filing threads where you can get some deep anecdotal insights on companies that you would have otherwise never been able to find through research.
3. SkyMarshal ◴[] No.26612707[source]
Same. Also, even studies without obvious flaws need to be reproduced with same results multiple times before we can start accepting the conclusion. A single study is at best suggestive.
4. chiefalchemist ◴[] No.26612791[source]
Perhaps. But in this case, 15 ppl is not a "study". Furthermore, this had no control group.

This is not the type of information we come to HN for.

5. pizza ◴[] No.26613123[source]
Wait a little longer and you'll almost surely get comments pointing out why the top comments are bad as well lol :)
6. say_it_as_it_is ◴[] No.26619935[source]
If the study was about covid vaccinations, would you decide not to get a shot based on what an anonymous person on HN thought? The diffusion of expert opinions here makes it hard to take seriously.