but I'm pretty sure that person doesn't exist
-
-
Replying to @TylerGlaiel @sohakes and
I guarantee you that person exists - they are just very scientific people, and obviously rare, as you might expect.
1 reply 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @cmuratori @sohakes and
doesn't exist *in significant enough numbers to matter
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @TylerGlaiel @sohakes and
Well, I would argue the same about people who really understood the vaccine before taking it, and the possible long-term epidemiological outcomes, too :)
1 reply 0 retweets 6 likes -
Replying to @cmuratori @sohakes and
we have a very useful shortcut for that called "listen to the experts" though
1 reply 0 retweets 6 likes -
Replying to @TylerGlaiel @sohakes and
That sentiment I do object to. Saying "listen to the experts" presumes the person knows who is an expert, which is precisely the thing in question here. I point again to examples, such as "eat mostly carbohydrates" situation.
3 replies 0 retweets 12 likes -
Replying to @cmuratori @TylerGlaiel and
As a simple example, when programming, should you listen to "experts" like Uncle Bob Martin? Bjarne Stroustrup? The average CS professor at a college?
2 replies 0 retweets 9 likes -
Replying to @cmuratori @TylerGlaiel and
If your answer is "yes", then I guess I understand why you think what you think about medical experts. If your answer is "no", you have some explaining to do :)
2 replies 0 retweets 7 likes -
Replying to @cmuratori @TylerGlaiel and
well the medical field actually runs experimental trials, while the programming field generally doesn't. Which isn't to say you should automatically believe either side, but that's the obvious explanation for trusting one group while distrusting another.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Lokathor @TylerGlaiel and
The programming field runs them literally all the time. There are mountains of benchmarks, and thousands of papers with measurements in them that are under conditions at least as controlled as any medical trial ever conducted.
2 replies 0 retweets 4 likes
If anything, medicine's "benchmarks" are much less rigorous, because they have untold numbers of variables they do not even know about, let alone control for, whereas the number of such things in most programming benchmarks is at least more finite.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.