Comment by refulgentis

2 years ago

Godwin's Law.*

If you're from a certain background it's exactly as described. In academia, frankly probably everywhere but tech, experiments as a term of art require consent when they involve humans.

* n.b. you really should have left it out, it was a good post through "hyperbole", got close-minded in the next sentence, then just sort of blew the hatch doors off. Sometimes we just don't know something someone else knows. Not understanding someone else doesn't require they have a psychological condition, much less one worth noting.

A bank sends out two different mailers to see which gets a higher response rate. A politician tests different versions of his stump speech to see which gets more applause. A standup comedian tries different variants of a joke to see which gets more laughs. A grocery store chain tests different store layouts to see which encourages more spending on expensive high margin items. A big box store tests different doorbuster sales to see which gets more people into the store. A city government tests whether changing a traffic light pattern decreases delays at the intersection.

Unless you’re a hermit you are an unwitting participant in nonconsensual human experiments on a daily basis.

Please stop. "Godwin's Law" is irrelevant bullshit. It's not a "law" and it doesn't prove anything, or do anything except add noise to the conversation.

  • Right? Parent is basically saying “wow it’s so unfortunate that you have forced me to end the conversation here, I’d have really liked to continue, but it’d be against the (entirely made up, by me) law”.

    • Where?

      N.b. "godwin's Law" is the famous joke that as an Internet discussion approaches infinity length, hitler will be brought up

      Not a secret message saying discussion over lol

      1 reply →