Kenneth Chang

.@kchangnyt next time you need someone to fact-check your history of probability (or your history of major math prizes -- though fewer howlers in your article on that score), look me up

Not sure what you're complaining about. Furstenberg's and Margulis's work obviously is not probability theory.

Ah, great. The usual bullshit deflection you get from a journalist when even mildly criticising them… #Journalism

No problem with receiving criticism but just saying everything wrong without citing anything in particular isn't helpful.

Oh, but of course @MBarany didn’t say anything remotely like “everything wrong”. He specifically pointed to the bit touching on the history of probability. And anyone who is actually interested in criticism wld simply ask for clarification—instead of knee-jerk deflection.

I wrote "Not sure what you're complaining about. Furstenberg's and Margulis's work obviously is not probability theory." How is that not asking for clarification?

You mean apart from the fact that what you wrote was not even formally a question (ie a way of “not asking”)? Maybe the first sentence’s dismissive phrasing? Or perhaps the pejorative word choice (“complaining”)?

How is that more dismissive than "love it when the nytimes journalist just runs with the nonsense about 20th century history spouted by the mathematicians he interviews"? How is the original complaint useful?