| ▲ | N_Lens 6 hours ago | |||||||
I believe this drive to record all the data and control everything (through science or surveillance) is misguided (And perhaps a bit paranoid) and will lead to poor outcomes for everyone. | ||||||||
| ▲ | nedruod 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] | |||||||
Can I mention the irony that this seems a "bit" paranoid? "bit" because, yes, you do have some good examples of failures to call to, but still, consider how much good would have to be chucked to have avoided those by a general aversion to not record any data at all. You're fear that it will lead to poor outcomes didn't ask what's given up.. whether there might be good outcomes. A rational, bounded set of fears (not paranoid), would have to consider those possibilities too. When I do that I come to the belief that the responses to those fears live at a higher level.. being careful about how we store data, being careful about how we interpret data, being careful about how we communicate data. The answer is not being afraid to gather data. | ||||||||
| ||||||||
| ▲ | Balgair 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | |||||||
Especially in something as squishy as biology. A field famous for withholding any kind of certainty. Sure, DNA seems like something that is 'real' and 'grounded', but once you get into the specifics of even sample collection and handling, those little errors in the Gaussian distributions start adding up (in quadrature!) and it is surprising how fast the error bars end up swamping any kind of knowledge. | ||||||||