Comment by romanhn

7 months ago

To be clear, I meant the author does not have full context.

That makes sense. It is possible that Google search got better and not worse since it was taken over by the guy that used to run Yahoo search, in which case context would thoroughly vindicate the choice to promote SEO spam sites and make ads and search results nearly indistinguishable.

  • This is like that scene in the Simpsons where Lisa tries to teach Homer that correlation does not equal causation by telling him that a rock keeps bears away, and he responds by wanting to buy the rock.

    Correlation isn't causation. Don't just buy that someone is fully to blame because someone told you they were fully to blame.

    • What part of the article would you refute aside from generally disagreeing with the idea that a manager can be considered responsible for what they’re in charge of? I’m not sure “management possesses an indelible philosophical unknowability” was Lisa’s point

    • Zitron spends paragraphs trying to convince the reader that Google Search sucks now mostly because of the efforts of one person.

      I don't understand the correlation isn't causation argument in this context. If no one ever tried to convince others of their thesis, with numerous arguments, what's the point of writing?

      3 replies →