Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

So much of academia is about connections and reputation laundering

statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 223 posts

Re: So much of academia is about connections and reputation laundering

#11

Post by dasudasu »

threwawasy1228 wrote: post #7
dasudasu wrote: post #3

This is seen even in very technical fields, such as physics. As the saying goes in poker, if you are in academia and can't spot this person, then it's probably you. It's also a slightly cynical take on imposter's syndrome, in a way.

Could you elaborate on this latter point further? I guess maybe I have impostor's syndrome but I have a hard time understanding how you could ever tell if you are that person or not. Imagine the following that I saw on a poker video recently: You have a table full of top-tier poker players and you have a rookie who won a contest to be in a game alongside them. The rookie is playing absolutely terrible, the commentato…

Poker is still a game of chance with beginner's luck being a thing. It's a quote from Buffett, relayed from poker folklore: As they say in poker, “If you’ve been in the game 30 minutes and you don’t know who the patsy is, you’re the patsy.”

Re: So much of academia is about connections and reputation laundering

#12

Post by [deleted] »

a0w49tjaw4jrt wrote: post #6

Headline and article content don't line up very well. Actual (short) body of article makes the point that when people in positions of power don't have significant training in statistics, it isn't surprising that they don't understand statistics. But that they do need to understand how much they don't understand. The article says next to nothing about gaming of professional achievement in academia.

[deleted]

Re: So much of academia is about connections and reputation laundering

#13

Post by thedudeabides5 »

smnthermes wrote: post #10
mcnamaratw wrote: post #2

It's not clear what technical content this post has. A cubic polynomial vs time would be a terrible idea, but the dashed and/or dotted red line (that people seem upset about) is obviously not a cubic polynomial vs time. At that point I run out of guesses about exactly what's being said by anybody.

The article may not have technical content, but the title certainly is true: http://pseudoexpertise.com/

Well the flame is saying it's a misunderstanding of the difference between data smoothing and model-based forecasting.

To which I'd say that just begs the question of if there's a difference to begin with, and what criteria you would use to distinguish them if they are.

Re: So much of academia is about connections and reputation laundering

#14

Post by oneiftwo »

> which is the general level of mediocrity, even at the top levels of academia

This is not unique to academia. Our entire society has gradually degenerated over the last few decades for a number of constructively interfering reasons:

1. We told two+ generations of children that everyone was capable of anything, gave them all awards after every "competition", and that kind of upbringing makes it difficult to recognize merit.

2. We've lowered the bar for standards across education, in an attempt to bring our lowest up, failing to realize that the primary result was bringing our best down. That hurts merit at professional levels especially, where the pipeline effectively shrinks.

3. Our media has regressed to the lowest common denominator. The most popular sources of influence in our society are uncredentialed hacks who spread misinformation ("Dr." Phil, "Dr." Oz, Oprah, etc). Even our official "news" sources are primarily entertainment venues and are fully editorialized. This makes it extremely difficult for the average person to recognize merit.

It's like our entire culture has been consumed by charisma, such that incompetence permeates every sector of our economy and society. Things were too easy for too long, and now we face a reckoning - either we fix things or our nation collapses. There's no room for popularity contests, crony capitalism, or diversity initiatives during times of crisis.

Edit: what about this comment is deserving of being flagged?

Re: So much of academia is about connections and reputation laundering

#15

Post by ahelwer »

oneiftwo wrote: post #14

> which is the general level of mediocrity, even at the top levels of academia This is not unique to academia. Our entire society has gradually degenerated over the last few decades for a number of constructively interfering reasons: 1. We told two+ generations of children that everyone was capable of anything, gave them all awards after every "competition", and that kind of upbringing makes it difficult to recognize…

What is with this ridiculous fixation people have on participation trophies? I'm serious, where is this idea coming from? Was it an object of moral concern in the media before I was old enough to remember or something?

Getting a stupid ribbon in third grade is not going to radically inform your approach to life.

Re: So much of academia is about connections and reputation laundering

#16

Post by mcnamaratw »

thedudeabides5 wrote: post #13
smnthermes wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The article may not have technical content, but the title certainly is true: http://pseudoexpertise.com/

Well the flame is saying it's a misunderstanding of the difference between data smoothing and model-based forecasting. To which I'd say that just begs the question of if there's a difference to begin with, and what criteria you would use to distinguish them if they are.

Of course there's a difference between smoothing and forecasting. It's the difference between interpolation and extrapolation.

But I can't figure out what anyone in the original discussion is really saying, if anything.

Re: So much of academia is about connections and reputation laundering

#17

Post by dunkelheit »

thedudeabides5 wrote: post #13
smnthermes wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The article may not have technical content, but the title certainly is true: http://pseudoexpertise.com/

Well the flame is saying it's a misunderstanding of the difference between data smoothing and model-based forecasting. To which I'd say that just begs the question of if there's a difference to begin with, and what criteria you would use to distinguish them if they are.

To begin, if the curve doesn't extend into the future, it can't forecast anything.

Re: So much of academia is about connections and reputation laundering

#18

Post by Animats »

mcnamaratw wrote: post #2

It's not clear what technical content this post has. A cubic polynomial vs time would be a terrible idea, but the dashed and/or dotted red line (that people seem upset about) is obviously not a cubic polynomial vs time. At that point I run out of guesses about exactly what's being said by anybody.

Um, yes.

The statistical community has not been doing well with the coronavirus epidemic. Nobody's models seem to be predicting well. Nor is the source data for anything but deaths very good.

This matters, because the current plan US plan seems to be "open things up and wait for herd immunity". How much time, and how many deaths, lie between now and that point? I dunno.

Re: So much of academia is about connections and reputation laundering

#20

Post by hpoe »

ahelwer wrote: post #15
oneiftwo wrote: post #14

> which is the general level of mediocrity, even at the top levels of academia This is not unique to academia. Our entire society has gradually degenerated over the last few decades for a number of constructively interfering reasons: 1. We told two+ generations of children that everyone was capable of anything, gave them all awards after every "competition", and that kind of upbringing makes it difficult to recognize…

What is with this ridiculous fixation people have on participation trophies? I'm serious, where is this idea coming from? Was it an object of moral concern in the media before I was old enough to remember or something? Getting a stupid ribbon in third grade is not going to radically inform your approach to life.

So I agree that people have a fixation on "participation trophies" but the problem it attempts to address, essentially the featherbedding of education is a serious one.

In response to your question, about the stupid ribbon, it probably won't but that's the point. Everyone got a freaking ribbon, everyone got a ribbon in third grade, and fourth grade, and so when someone is actually exceptional how do you then distinguish them, you can't. It's not that the ribbon changed anything because you got it, it's because everyone got it that made it worthless.

Suddenly everyone can prove to everyone how smart they are, meanwhile those that are actually exceptional in an area without an easily defined winners and loser bracket can never be recognized. This leads quickly to a situation where my ignorance is as good as your facts because we are all can be "right in our own way."

The result leads to a distortion of facts a society that can agree on basic reality and everything being run by conmen and manipulators because they realized early on that was the only way to get ahead. Starting to sound familiar?

Post reply on HN