Debunking Princeton

#1

Post by friggeri » Thu, Jan 23, 2014, 10:08 PM UTC

Re: Debunking Princeton

#2

Post by tokenadult » Thu, Jan 23, 2014, 10:26 PM UTC

A suitably joking response for a "study" that didn't need to be taken too seriously (and wasn't taken very seriously by most media outlets, including the one that led a story with it). As we discussed yesterday here on Hacker News[1], the study methodology was not sufficiently validated to convince most people that Facebook will massively lose users, even if all the data were correct. More likely, the study's model was just flat wrong.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7104904

Re: Debunking Princeton

#3

Post by DaniFong » Thu, Jan 23, 2014, 10:27 PM UTC

Big data: 0. Smart analysis: 1. Snark: 100. :-)

Re: Debunking Princeton

#4

Post by augustocallejas » Thu, Jan 23, 2014, 10:28 PM UTC

One of the top comments on that page is that they loved the tone of article. Personally I hate sarcastic responses (no matter how correct you are), which sound very unprofessional. I hope to see less of these types of responses in the future.

Re: Debunking Princeton

#5

Post by curiousAl » Thu, Jan 23, 2014, 10:29 PM UTC

Google Trends Extrapolation: The Nostradamus of our times.

Re: Debunking Princeton

#6

Post by hatred » Thu, Jan 23, 2014, 10:29 PM UTC

tokenadult wrote: post #2

A suitably joking response for a "study" that didn't need to be taken too seriously (and wasn't taken very seriously by most media outlets, including the one that led a story with it). As we discussed yesterday here on Hacker News[1], the study methodology was not sufficiently validated to convince most people that Facebook will massively lose users, even if all the data were correct. More likely, the study's model w…

Some people on the Wall Street did take it up a bit seriously perhaps going by the price movement today.

Re: Debunking Princeton

#7

Post by smoyer » Thu, Jan 23, 2014, 10:31 PM UTC

Hmmmm ... I think I believe both articles! Higher education and social media are both in decline. Who needs critical thinking and the ability to gossip 24/7? I'm going to go rewatch Idiocracy (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0387808/).

Re: Debunking Princeton

#8

Post by joelgrus » Thu, Jan 23, 2014, 10:33 PM UTC

This is pretty funny, although they ruined it with their "HEY GUYS THIS WAS A JOKE" at the end.

Re: Debunking Princeton

#9

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Jan 23, 2014, 10:34 PM UTC

augustocallejas wrote: post #4

One of the top comments on that page is that they loved the tone of article. Personally I hate sarcastic responses (no matter how correct you are), which sound very unprofessional. I hope to see less of these types of responses in the future.

[deleted]

Re: Debunking Princeton

#10

Post by poopsintub » Thu, Jan 23, 2014, 10:35 PM UTC

hatred wrote: post #6

tokenadult wrote: post #2

A suitably joking response for a "study" that didn't need to be taken too seriously (and wasn't taken very seriously by most media outlets, including the one that led a story with it). As we discussed yesterday here on Hacker News[1], the study methodology was not sufficiently validated to convince most people that Facebook will massively lose users, even if all the data were correct. More likely, the study's model w…

Some people on the Wall Street did take it up a bit seriously perhaps going by the price movement today.

My investment account seems to disagree too. The stock was down more than $1 before the market even opened based on that sham study by Princeton.