Jerzy Neyman, Sigmund Freud, and Milton Friedman walk into a bar . . .

and the horrible "gold standard science" slogan

Recently on the blog:

• On the statement, “American academia is entering a period of even more uncertainty”

• Stanford Human Trafficking Data Lab Hiring for a Full-time Postdoctoral Scholar

• When are AI/ML models unlikely to help with decision-making?

• Anything you can do with Bayesian inference you can do in other ways. Bayesian inference is a bit like calculus: You can do derivatives and integrals without calculus (indeed, mathematicians in pre-Newtonian times were able to compute limits, with care), but calculus makes it a lot easier. Similarly, I find that Bayesian inference makes it a lot easier to combine information.

• More on the emptiness of the government’s “gold standard science” slogan

• Survey Statistics: 2 flavors of calibration

• “Gold standard science”

• Pascal’s triangle, the Ramanujan principle, and what makes something look like a part of an ellipse or a part a parabola?

• Survey Statistics: it is the people

• LLMs as behavioral study participants

• Ecologists’ endless quest for automatic inference

• Jerzy Neyman, Sigmund Freud, and Milton Friedman walk into a bar . . . (the mistaken association of null hypothesis testing with rigor)

Enjoy.