31–40 of 58 posts
So, after all the stories, all the submissions, and all the hype, perhaps the whole thing was a hoax after all. Also interestingly, it looks like the BBC have changed the text on the referenced page. Originally it reported the story, but now it claims it's a hoax. Can anyone get the original text? I've not been able to get it from the Google cache. Here are some of the submissions of the story: http://news.ycombinato…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can anyone get the original text? It is a bit annoying how the BBC non-transparently correct their articles. The old version is cached here: http://www.webcitation.org/60evsCAry
We run a web content monitoring service, every media organisation changes their articles as they get new info. No reference is ever made to these changes. It's actually really interesting seeing how stories get updated.
Reading the cached article, and then going back to the original, I think it is fully within your duty to inform your readers that the article has been updated specifically for the reason of clarification and acknowledging a mistake was made, and that new information has come to the fore.
Trying to hide behind that by virtually rewriting the article is just unsavory, and I expect better from the BBC News.
Sorry if it seems like I'm taking a high road here, but I am; retroactive continuity has NO place in journalism.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can anyone get the original text? It is a bit annoying how the BBC non-transparently correct their articles. The old version is cached here: http://www.webcitation.org/60evsCAry
We run a web content monitoring service, every media organisation changes their articles as they get new info. No reference is ever made to these changes. It's actually really interesting seeing how stories get updated.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The subtext of the story is insulting, and easily disproven: we're supposed to think that choice of browser somehow reflects on a person's intelligence. It is ridiculous that HN picked it up in the first place. In other words, even if it was true, what can we do with this knowledge? Oh, right: continue to judge people for their choice in a trivial matter. The tech industry really needs to get over itself.
If it were true that stupid people prefer X, then yes: your preference for X would suggest that you were stupid. Preferring X, however, wouldn't _make_ you stupid if you weren't, just as your IQ won't leak out to 'fill the vacuum' were you to attend a Stupidity Convention. It's just statistics; it's not black magic. Assertions about groups are not assertions about individuals, so don't just treat one as the other. >…
This is not correct. Stupid people prefer eating over starving, but a preference for eating does not suggest that you are stupid.
Journalism lives and dies by SEO. And if they take their time to carefully check their sources on every story before posting it, then they'll find themselves on the 6th page of Google b/c everybody has already beaten them to the punch. Speed and verification of sources are in total conflict with each other - it's a tough business.
Sadly, I don't think the retraction will be more than a blip.
"...had invited 100,000 web users to take IQ tests..." Besides the hoax, someone forgot about: "Voluntary response data are worthless." http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2772603 Because of that, this should have never even been published.
So are you saying that no response data ever should be published, or people should be forced to take surveys and what not?
"free online IQ testing" as the source didn't give it away?
Secondly browser use is often contextual. I have reasons for using most major browsers, at any given time I may be falling into any demographic... I'm sure many here are the same.
"'It's obviously very easy to create a bogus site like this - as all phishers know it's easy to rip-off someone else's webpages and pictures,' he said."
So setting up a fake site with fake data is elaborate? Seems like these news agencies are the ones with IQs in the ~80s.
I'll probably get downvoted to oblivion for this, but here goes... I think there may be some truth to this rumor. I do a lot of advertising on TrafficVance which is basically pop-up advertising on computers with adware. One thing I noticed regarding the traffic I received to my landing pages was that a disproportionately high number of my visitors were using Internet Explorer. The percentages were so disproportionate…
It really depends on what technology you mean.
I used to know a lot of graduate students in the biochem dept of my university. They were quite clearly very competent with technology that was important for them. But if you mean technology as in computing technology, then no. Most of them did not care much about them at all. And many (most?) used IE 6 as well.
Personally I wouldn't rate their intelligence as below normal just because they did not have an affinity towards technology that I happened to be enthusiastic about.