Recent submissions

Comment · 8 years ago
Pointing out the simple, obvious definition is still better than any argument that you’ve made about anything here, IMO.

I’d love to hear you make an argument that will shed light on things from your knowledge of the “murky the field of empiricism” though. Let’s hear it!

So far all of you’ve done is point out what it is. I don’t think you really explained how it helps your case at all. How does it invalidate the easily observable fact that you can see plenty of people leaving reviews for apps that they are just fine with?

You said people don’t leave those types of reviews but there they are. So what are you going to say that makes them somehow disappear? Really, I’d like to understand. Do we really need Plato though to explore this? I think if you really understand something you should be able to explain in pretty simple terms.

Comment · 8 years ago
The definition of empirical is: “based on, concerned with, or verifiable by observation or experience rather than theory or pure logic.”

Was there a salient point that you were trying to make or are you just going to continue to misrepresent definitions of words that you can easily look up for yourself?

Comment · 8 years ago
I’ve written them personally. You can also go and look at some of them yourself. That’s what empirical means.
Comment · 8 years ago
OK and I’ve seen plenty of 2.5 - 3 star reviews where people were just fine with the app too. Same thing with products on Amazon. I’ve also left review such as this myself.

People like sharing their experiences with others. They’ve been doing it for thousands of years. Go figure.

Care to try again?

Comment · 8 years ago
> People who are fine with their apps don't write reviews.

This is obviously incorrect since you can see positive reviews, many of them in fact, on many apps. I myself have posted positive reviews... not sure when you thought I agreed to this.

That alone pretty much kills your whole theory. Sorry but I still don’t agree with you and I think you’re really reaching here. Most importantly though, you have presented zero evidence in favor of your claims.

Comment · 8 years ago
How hard is it to destroy things? If people wanted to they could start breaking shit and then there would be no cameras watching them.

Can you manufacture devices faster than people can break them? I think some sort of mass uprising could still work.

Comment · 8 years ago
OK and all I’m saying is that you have not presented any evidence for your claim at all.
Comment · 8 years ago
You've got no evidence and your logic regarding sample sizes is unsound.

10% is a huge sample size for any survey. Look at how it's calculated - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sample_size_determination

or just plug in your numbers here - https://www.checkmarket.com/sample-size-calculator/

EDIT: Someone is also flagging or downvoting your comments. Not me.

Where is your evidence for anything that you’ve said? Where is your evidence that it's polluted?

Comment · 8 years ago
Actually, 10% of a population is a damn good sample size for just about any scientific or medical study. It’s quite large to be honest.

Anyway, once again... where is your evidence that this rarely happens?

Comment · 8 years ago
Incorrect again. The fact that you can go onto any apps review history and see evidence that people are unhappy with updates that break their stuff is exactly the definition of empirical evidence.

Sorry, but none of your badly formed, hand-wavy reasoning has proven that wrong. Also, nobody is arguing that "the majority" think something - I'm arguing against your completely anecdotal and un-evidenced claim that it "rarely" happens.

What evidence do you have that it rarely happens? None that I can see so far...

Comment · 8 years ago
Hmmm, well I'd say that beyond a very superficial comparison with "keyboards" from 200 years ago (if there even were such a thing), modern keyboards have changed a lot and for good reason.

I'm sure glad that my ancestors decided to move out of their caves.

Comment · 8 years ago
> App reviews aren't really empirical.

Yes they are. The definition of empirical is that you can observe the evidence. This is easily observable.

What have you presented besides your own anecdotes?

> "Apps like this" on Windows/Linux

It's called Google. The same thing I use to find iOS apps because Apples app store search and recommendations are horrible. None of the app store searches are really any good and I'm pretty sure Google is the number one place that people usually search for things. I don't know anybody who opens up their app store to search for an app.

Anyway, argue all you want - you're wrong. People care about updates that mess up their stuff whether you can bring yourself to acknowledge that or not.

Comment · 8 years ago
Incorrect. It happens regularly and it certainly affects non-developers. I've seen it too many times. Look through any apps review history and you'll find people complaining about changes that they have no control over.

It's the same thing with the OS. There are always tons of complaints after a new release of iOS.

> ...I'll just use another one.

Yep. And you'll spend your time looking for another one and then you'll spend more time transitioning over to it.

> Most people don't think "Oh man I love Instagram v50.1.2",they just use Instagram.

Nope. Instead they think - "Oh man, Instagram sucks after that last update, but what can I do about it??" and then they give up.

Live from the official Hacker News API

A modern reader for Hacker News · SvelteKit + Skeleton