TechTakes

1398 readers

97 users here now

Big brain tech dude got yet another clueless take over at HackerNews etc? Here's the place to vent. Orange site, VC foolishness, all welcome.

This is not debate club. Unless it’s amusing debate.

For actually-good tech, you want our NotAwfulTech community

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

Where's Your Ed At- The Cult of Microsoft (www.wheresyoured.at)

submitted 2 weeks ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

51 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Spooky stuff that helps explain a lot of the dysfunction flowing out from Microsoft.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 17 points 2 weeks ago (24 children)

this post gave me a couple rounds of whiplash but this was the hardest turn on the rollercoaster:

when they tried to summarize the findings of growth mindset and quickly dismissing it without couching in the ongoing reproducibility issue in psychology

do you people come off a factory line like this?

[–] [email protected] 13 points 2 weeks ago (22 children)

Did they read the same article? It addresses this pretty directly I thought.

[+] [email protected] -13 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (14 children)

Can you cite where they reference the reproducibility issue in psychology? I thought I read it carefully and thought deeply about my criticism. I don't expect people to agree, of course, but to engage sincerely. So I went back and scanned it again and still don't see it mentioned.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

you’re about to waste my fucking time but:

Mindset theory itself is incredibly controversial for a number of reasons, chief of which is that nobody can seem to reliably replicate the results of Dweck's academic work.

Ed links an article that talks about elements of the replication crisis in enough detail for an article where the replication crisis isn’t anywhere near on-topic, and I don’t think the article would be better if it included that detail

feel free to include evidence in your reply that you aren’t here to be a debate shitlord

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 week ago

I'm also confused as to what the takeaway was supposed to be here. Like, because a whole bunch of different famous psych studies fail to replicate maybe this one is less invalid?