Although it is tough to tell, it definitely seems like Gizmodo may have stripped out some of his sources. From Gizmodo's preamble:
> Two charts and several hyperlinks are also omitted.
I think we should give him the benefit of the doubt that there were probably sources. As has been noted in the original YC post about this, it seems like he gets a lot of his info from this study:
> Two charts and several hyperlinks are also omitted.
I think we should give him the benefit of the doubt that there were probably sources. As has been noted in the original YC post about this, it seems like he gets a lot of his info from this study:
http://sci-hub.cc/10.1111/j.1751-9004.2010.00320.x