Of course I've got a blog. Who doesn't?

Music, books, movies, TV, games, hobbies, food, and potent potables. And forum games! Pour a drink, put on your smoking jacket, light a pipe (of whatever), and settle in.
User avatar
JasonL
Posts: 21014
Joined: 05 May 2010, 17:22

Re: Of course I've got a blog. Who doesn't?

Post by JasonL » 03 Dec 2013, 10:07

Maybe they are interested in the concept of doing the skypey group watch and want to see how it worked for you and not so much interested in your content per se?

User avatar
Highway
Posts: 12182
Joined: 12 May 2011, 00:22
Location: the Electric Ocean

Re: Of course I've got a blog. Who doesn't?

Post by Highway » 03 Dec 2013, 10:16

That's what I'd think if it was one and done, but we're at week 9 of 1500+ views minimum (torrent and youtube). I don't think people are 'wrong' for listening to it (heck, we're the ones posting it), it just seems like weird content to consume. I'd love to get more of those people commenting on my posts, too. :)
"Sharks do not go around challenging people to games of chance like dojo breakers."

User avatar
tr0g
Posts: 6450
Joined: 11 May 2011, 10:21
Location: At the shop

Re: Of course I've got a blog. Who doesn't?

Post by tr0g » 03 Dec 2013, 10:49

Highway wrote: I mean, I think it's kinda cool, but wow, don't people have better things to do?
No, people do not have better things to do with their time. Or more precisely, they may have better things to do but instead they are fucking off on the internet and avoiding those things.

This may be one of the few lessons I have learned from the internet I can use in polite company.
Yeah but how can you tell at a glance which junk a raccoon is packing? Also, gay raccoons? - Hugh Akston
Nothing you can say is as important as the existence of a functioning marketplace of ideas, go set yourself on fire. - JasonL

User avatar
Stevo Darkly
Posts: 7242
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 19:13

Re: Of course I've got a blog. Who doesn't?

Post by Stevo Darkly » 03 Dec 2013, 16:55

Also, one or more of you might be hot.
"I don't know if you can call it a stereotype when I was in a room full of people actually doing it." -- Keith S.

User avatar
Highway
Posts: 12182
Joined: 12 May 2011, 00:22
Location: the Electric Ocean

Re: Of course I've got a blog. Who doesn't?

Post by Highway » 03 Dec 2013, 17:04

Stevo Darkly wrote:Also, one or more of you might be hot.
I guess you mean 'sound hot'. No video.
"Sharks do not go around challenging people to games of chance like dojo breakers."

User avatar
Stevo Darkly
Posts: 7242
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 19:13

Re: Of course I've got a blog. Who doesn't?

Post by Stevo Darkly » 03 Dec 2013, 17:14

Highway wrote:
Stevo Darkly wrote:Also, one or more of you might be hot.
I guess you mean 'sound hot'. No video.
Oh, I misunderstood how Skype works with all this stuff.
"I don't know if you can call it a stereotype when I was in a room full of people actually doing it." -- Keith S.

User avatar
Highway
Posts: 12182
Joined: 12 May 2011, 00:22
Location: the Electric Ocean

Re: Of course I've got a blog. Who doesn't?

Post by Highway » 03 Dec 2013, 17:26

We could do video calls, but we don't. I don't have a camera, for one. Another guy is wheelchair bound. I mean, we're all anime nerds. :)
"Sharks do not go around challenging people to games of chance like dojo breakers."

User avatar
Jadagul
Posts: 6299
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 18:51

Re: Of course I've got a blog. Who doesn't?

Post by Jadagul » 09 Jul 2015, 19:58

Finally got around to writing that post about the difference between science and engineering, and why you shouldn't replace a solid tradition with two studies.

User avatar
Jennifer
Posts: 20444
Joined: 28 Apr 2010, 14:03

Re: Of course I've got a blog. Who doesn't?

Post by Jennifer » 09 Jul 2015, 21:24

Jadagul wrote:Finally got around to writing that post about the difference between science and engineering, and why you shouldn't replace a solid tradition with two studies.
That was interesting, especially the bit about being unable to "engineer" nutrition yet.

Is that your cartoon, or someone else's?
"Myself, despite what they say about libertarians, I think we're actually allowed to pursue options beyond futility or sucking the dicks of the powerful." -- Eric the .5b

User avatar
Jadagul
Posts: 6299
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 18:51

Re: Of course I've got a blog. Who doesn't?

Post by Jadagul » 09 Jul 2015, 21:29

Jennifer wrote:
Jadagul wrote:Finally got around to writing that post about the difference between science and engineering, and why you shouldn't replace a solid tradition with two studies.
That was interesting, especially the bit about being unable to "engineer" nutrition yet.

Is that your cartoon, or someone else's?
Thanks!


It's definitely someone else's comic strip. I can't draw!

When I wrote the post I couldn't find the original, but now I have, so it's credited now. Thanks for poking me to do that.

User avatar
Painboy
Posts: 3153
Joined: 18 Feb 2013, 11:33
Location: Seattle

Re: Of course I've got a blog. Who doesn't?

Post by Painboy » 09 Jul 2015, 22:38

Jadagul wrote:Finally got around to writing that post about the difference between science and engineering, and why you shouldn't replace a solid tradition with two studies.
Liked that a lot. I find I run into this a lot over the years and have put my head down at work or wherever when someone finds themselves a study. They will then not only begin drawing conclusions they shouldn't they may even start acting like an authority on subject. There is a real lack of understanding among many people that can't seem to grasp that "a study" doesn't necessarily confirm anything. They have no idea of the actual failure rate many studies have when trying to replicate the result in another study. It doesn't help when any confirmation/disconfirmation of a study can often take years. So by the time someone says the original study is wrong many people will already be living like it's true.

Also is there some reason you "liked" your own blog?

User avatar
Jadagul
Posts: 6299
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 18:51

Re: Of course I've got a blog. Who doesn't?

Post by Jadagul » 09 Jul 2015, 22:42

Painboy wrote:
Jadagul wrote:Finally got around to writing that post about the difference between science and engineering, and why you shouldn't replace a solid tradition with two studies.
Liked that a lot. I find I run into this a lot over the years and have put my head down at work or wherever when someone finds themselves a study. They will then not only begin drawing conclusions they shouldn't they may even start acting like an authority on subject. There is a real lack of understanding among many people that can't seem to grasp that "a study" doesn't necessarily confirm anything. They have no idea of the actual failure rate many studies have when trying to replicate the result in another study. It doesn't help when any confirmation/disconfirmation of a study can often take years. So by the time someone says the original study is wrong many people will already be living like it's true.

Also is there some reason you "liked" your own blog?
Because Tumblr's interface is weird. I liked someone's response to my post; liking a reblog gives a like to the post that's clicked on and also the original.

And thanks.

User avatar
thoreau
Posts: 24445
Joined: 06 May 2010, 12:56
Location: Back to the lab again

Re: Of course I've got a blog. Who doesn't?

Post by thoreau » 09 Jul 2015, 22:48

I look at it this way: many branches of engineering are older than the natural sciences, depending on how you define those fields and their dates of origin. Other branches of engineering are almost as old as the natural science fields that they draw most heavily on. But social endeavors have always been art forms, and most efforts to systematize them have failed, usually in proportion to the scale on which they were attempted.

Even business, the closest you will get to systematizing a social endeavor (production and exchange of goods is inherently social in that it involves human interaction, not in the sense of socialism), is ultimately an art. For every proclamation that a given business model is THE BEST way to do something, you can find examples of that model failing and other models succeeding to a similar degree.

This is why I am skeptical that social science will ever get its own engineering analogue. I mean, lots of scientific ideas never make their way into engineering, and lots of engineering ideas were worked out before the corresponding science was worked out. The Second Law of Thermodynamics was worked out AFTER the steam engine, yet physicists are leaders in trying to turn their attempts at social science into systematic engineering approaches to teaching. We should know better than that.
"The first rule of Grylliade club is 'Why are we talking about Grylliade club?'"
--Jake

User avatar
JasonL
Posts: 21014
Joined: 05 May 2010, 17:22

Re: Of course I've got a blog. Who doesn't?

Post by JasonL » 09 Jul 2015, 23:14

Jadagul wrote:Finally got around to writing that post about the difference between science and engineering, and why you shouldn't replace a solid tradition with two studies.
I liked this as well, and would add that modern modes of media likely exacerbate the issue. People are exposed to and can actively screen for anything that fits their priors. There is no public record of "the balance of the literature" so people just pick the study the like and their tribe will provide lots of links to reasons why that other study isn't worth a damn.

I've often thought about how to create a record of expert consensus that would have credibility. For issues of political concern like climate science, you are likely just screwed for a long time, but we should be able to do better on something like nutrition. Can we identify and track a set of key relevant factors that exclude very low impact influences so people can have some kind of reaction to the study? Can we report on the evidence that led to the collapse of the previous consensus? Can we make publicly digestible statements of uncertainty? Here are the things we think matter. Really nobody disagrees about this and this and this from previous research. That said there are these other things that are up for debate. Here is why that last thing we said wasn't quite right. We think it fits together like this now but this not The Law. Let's say we are 75% confident.

Right now, I think the professionals in many fields would be able to write those things down and get a lot of people to agree with them, but the act of translating into public consumption is not a strong suit of primary researchers and also there are forces that disincent the kind of disclosure to the public you'd make to a researcher. People focus on "is climate change happening" in the public record in part because they are afraid of what happens when people hear how much variance there is in estimates of the things that matter for magnitude like sensitivity.

User avatar
Jadagul
Posts: 6299
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 18:51

Re: Of course I've got a blog. Who doesn't?

Post by Jadagul » 09 Jul 2015, 23:21

JasonL wrote:
Jadagul wrote:Finally got around to writing that post about the difference between science and engineering, and why you shouldn't replace a solid tradition with two studies.
I liked this as well, and would add that modern modes of media likely exacerbate the issue. People are exposed to and can actively screen for anything that fits their priors. There is no public record of "the balance of the literature" so people just pick the study the like and their tribe will provide lots of links to reasons why that other study isn't worth a damn.

I've often thought about how to create a record of expert consensus that would have credibility. For issues of political concern like climate science, you are likely just screwed for a long time, but we should be able to do better on something like nutrition. Can we identify and track a set of key relevant factors that exclude very low impact influences so people can have some kind of reaction to the study? Can we report on the evidence that led to the collapse of the previous consensus? Can we make publicly digestible statements of uncertainty? Here are the things we think matter. Really nobody disagrees about this and this and this from previous research. That said there are these other things that are up for debate. Here is why that last thing we said wasn't quite right. We think it fits together like this now but this not The Law. Let's say we are 75% confident.

Right now, I think the professionals in many fields would be able to write those things down and get a lot of people to agree with them, but the act of translating into public consumption is not a strong suit of primary researchers and also there are forces that disincent the kind of disclosure to the public you'd make to a researcher. People focus on "is climate change happening" in the public record in part because they are afraid of what happens when people hear how much variance there is in estimates of the things that matter for magnitude like sensitivity.
It does turn out that that's really hard to do well. And not helped by the fact that our knowledge is genuinely unsettled (which is a large part of what I mean when I say there's no engineering praxis. Thoreau is skeptical of whether there _can_ be such a praxis on some of these subjects; I'm agnostic on whether we'll ever have one, but we certainly don't now).

That said, there are writers who make a real effort on some of these subjects. I'm partial to Greg Nuckols of Strength Theory for weightlifting and workout knowledge, for instance (and he's good at combining "successful historical practice" with "apparent implications of recent research"). But I feel like at least one thing limiting the market for that sort of writing is that the message is always going to be longer and more complicated than what most people want to deal with. The subjects are complicated, but people want simple answers, which will generally be overly reductionistic.

I do think the real win is in getting "simple advice" that is implementable but is an improvement over the previous "simple advice." But even that is fairly difficult to do.

User avatar
Jadagul
Posts: 6299
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 18:51

Re: Of course I've got a blog. Who doesn't?

Post by Jadagul » 09 Jul 2015, 23:23

thoreau wrote:I look at it this way: many branches of engineering are older than the natural sciences, depending on how you define those fields and their dates of origin. Other branches of engineering are almost as old as the natural science fields that they draw most heavily on. But social endeavors have always been art forms, and most efforts to systematize them have failed, usually in proportion to the scale on which they were attempted.

Even business, the closest you will get to systematizing a social endeavor (production and exchange of goods is inherently social in that it involves human interaction, not in the sense of socialism), is ultimately an art. For every proclamation that a given business model is THE BEST way to do something, you can find examples of that model failing and other models succeeding to a similar degree.

This is why I am skeptical that social science will ever get its own engineering analogue. I mean, lots of scientific ideas never make their way into engineering, and lots of engineering ideas were worked out before the corresponding science was worked out. The Second Law of Thermodynamics was worked out AFTER the steam engine, yet physicists are leaders in trying to turn their attempts at social science into systematic engineering approaches to teaching. We should know better than that.
You know, I think that inadvertently answers one of my questions. We _have_ largely successfully converted physics into engineering. Physicists thus expect to be able to convert all their other knowledge into engineering as well. This would explain some of the physics imperialism.

User avatar
Fin Fang Foom
Posts: 8940
Joined: 05 May 2010, 22:39

Re: Of course I've got a blog. Who doesn't?

Post by Fin Fang Foom » 09 Jul 2015, 23:25

Whatever, losers. You'll always be lame because you didn't invent the acheulean.
Saudi Arabia is doing something potentially harmful to America? Oh, hell. Does that mean we're going to invade Iraq again? - Jennifer

User avatar
Mo
Posts: 21098
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:08

Re: Of course I've got a blog. Who doesn't?

Post by Mo » 09 Jul 2015, 23:30

I think a lot of the problem with engineering social and biological systems is that there are so many inputs and factors that it's really hard to model. When you build a bridge, the factors you need to deal with on a regular basis are relatively limited (gravity, wind, temperature, etc). With nutrition you have a host of environmental factors, genetic factors and the associated interplay.
his voice is so soothing, but why do conspiracy nuts always sound like Batman and Robin solving one of Riddler's puzzles out loud? - fod

no one ever yells worldstar when a pet gets fucked up - dhex

User avatar
Painboy
Posts: 3153
Joined: 18 Feb 2013, 11:33
Location: Seattle

Re: Of course I've got a blog. Who doesn't?

Post by Painboy » 10 Jul 2015, 00:00

I would also point out in regards to nutrition that there are multiple competing parties that are always going to wreck any consensus view on nutrition. With all the Egg councils, Dairy councils, and government Raisin Committees, you aren't going to a consensus on much. Certainly nothing specific.

I have wondered for a while about the old government Food Pyramid. I'm curious if the proportions recommended would have a one to one basis of how powerful that industries's lobbying efforts were to their place in that pyramid.

User avatar
thoreau
Posts: 24445
Joined: 06 May 2010, 12:56
Location: Back to the lab again

Re: Of course I've got a blog. Who doesn't?

Post by thoreau » 10 Jul 2015, 00:12

Jadagul wrote:You know, I think that inadvertently answers one of my questions. We _have_ largely successfully converted physics into engineering. Physicists thus expect to be able to convert all their other knowledge into engineering as well. This would explain some of the physics imperialism.
Not really. It probably does explain physics imperialism in educational research, but not in most other fields that physics has tried to colonize. For instance, around the 80's there was a big exodus of chaos and complexity and statistical mechanics folks into other branches of science. If you were to ask them what they found they would say "We found that scale invariance shows up when we make graphs of certain functions of certain quantities found in some data sets. This blows our minds, man. Also, we can make neat-looking pictures with it." When you ask them what insight that actually gives, or what it is good for, they would wave their hands and spew some bullshit. These people are NOT converting anything into engineering. In fact, if they tried their hands at engineering, they would probably create An Incident and get reverse-exiled back to physics.

An interesting exercise would be to trace the academic family trees of the Physics Education Research community and see how applied their ancestral backgrounds were. Although nowadays you can get a PhD in Physics Education research, where you do your thesis research on educational questions (these people are less thoughtful than real social scientists but more thoughtful than the converts), Once Upon A Time there were physicists who got their PhDs for research into actual physics. I should trace their ancestry. I know some of their lineages, but I won't put my editorial commentary on them into this thread that isn't behind the veil.
"The first rule of Grylliade club is 'Why are we talking about Grylliade club?'"
--Jake

User avatar
JasonL
Posts: 21014
Joined: 05 May 2010, 17:22

Re: Of course I've got a blog. Who doesn't?

Post by JasonL » 10 Jul 2015, 09:09

I do think the real win is in getting "simple advice" that is implementable but is an improvement over the previous "simple advice." But even that is fairly difficult to do.
Completely agree, but I don't like the model of simple advice historically used though. I'm thinking of the doctor model here where they say very simply you need to do this or stop doing that. It overstates confidence by implication and also is disrespectful of weighting of preferences among the various parameters that may exist. You'd want to be able to say okay here are the 3-5 things that strongly affect this situation. If you choose more of this, you have to modify this other thing by about this much.

User avatar
the innominate one
Posts: 11831
Joined: 17 May 2011, 16:17
Location: hypertime continuum

Re: Of course I've got a blog. Who doesn't?

Post by the innominate one » 10 Jul 2015, 09:21

Mo wrote:I think a lot of the problem with engineering social and biological systems is that there are so many inputs and factors that it's really hard to model. When you build a bridge, the factors you need to deal with on a regular basis are relatively limited (gravity, wind, temperature, etc). With nutrition you have a host of environmental factors, genetic factors and the associated interplay.
This multiplied by about one million. Keep in mind there are about 10X more bacterial cells in and on the body than there are human cells comprising the body. Differences in the so-called microbiome of the microbial community (the 'normal flora') inhabiting individuals' bodies could account for much more of the differences among individuals than each person's genetic composition or eating habit do. We just don't know, because the tools for understanding have only recently been developed, are still in development and data are just starting to be compiled.
"Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." -E Benn

"No shit, Sherlock." -JsubD

"now is the time to go fuck yourself until you die." -dhex

User avatar
nicole
Posts: 7630
Joined: 12 Jan 2013, 16:28

Re: Of course I've got a blog. Who doesn't?

Post by nicole » 10 Jul 2015, 09:30

JasonL wrote:
I do think the real win is in getting "simple advice" that is implementable but is an improvement over the previous "simple advice." But even that is fairly difficult to do.
Completely agree, but I don't like the model of simple advice historically used though. I'm thinking of the doctor model here where they say very simply you need to do this or stop doing that. It overstates confidence by implication and also is disrespectful of weighting of preferences among the various parameters that may exist. You'd want to be able to say okay here are the 3-5 things that strongly affect this situation. If you choose more of this, you have to modify this other thing by about this much.
So much this. That kind of advice is why I never listen to my doctor. How am I supposed to trust the advice is right if she doesn't say, "If you care about X, do Y. If you care about Q, do R"?
"Fucking qualia." -Hugh Akston

"Privilege is having large phones fit into the garments that society expects you to wear." -Dangerman

User avatar
the innominate one
Posts: 11831
Joined: 17 May 2011, 16:17
Location: hypertime continuum

Re: Of course I've got a blog. Who doesn't?

Post by the innominate one » 10 Jul 2015, 09:40

I've also been misinformed by doctors, which is why I often have ignored doctors' advice, but on occasion to my detriment. You have to find a good doctor. I also need to find a good doctor, now that I'm not affiliated with the uni any more, and had to change doctors.
"Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." -E Benn

"No shit, Sherlock." -JsubD

"now is the time to go fuck yourself until you die." -dhex

User avatar
Warren
Posts: 21855
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:03
Location: Goat Rope MO
Contact:

Re: Of course I've got a blog. Who doesn't?

Post by Warren » 10 Jul 2015, 10:10

My bitch against doctors is they can't diagnose me.
THIS SPACE FOR RENT

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests