informatics; Reinhart-Rogoff's
findings were reversed when an additional 5 rows were included in a
spreadsheet they used to calculate their correlation between GDP growth and
debt ratios. And of course, they insist that despite the actual outcome being
_twice as strong and in the opposite direction_, they still support their
original position.

I wonder if one can get a CS PhD by producing enough retractions. Of course,
it won't win you many friends in the academy, and would probably lead to less
source code made available. But given the Perl code I've seen published who's
termination condition is a divide-by-zero exception, one can argue that peer
review in the information age has to include code review.

~~~
smartbit
Didn't know about the Reinhart-Rogoff controversy [0], interesting! They state
that they have been _careful not to claim that high debt causes slow growth,
but rather that it has an “association” with slow growth_.

[0] [http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/16/reinhart-rogoff-
aus...](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/16/reinhart-rogoff-austerity-
research-errors_n_3094015.html)

~~~
linhchi
I read abt this quite a bit, the refutation is attacking a small portion of
the data, because that small portion is trendy and hot in politics.

Judging academically, the original paper and the refuting paper is a healthy
debate, but the dynamic of the society and politics ab-use them to attack a
whole school of thought at large (the austrian school: less bailout, less
intervention by government, less control over everything) in favor of
keynesian school (more bailout, more government spending, more public debt,
especially in recession and crisis).

Anyway, it remains a controversy, because theoretically one can do what one
wants, but once it involves policy and real life matters, it is hard to argue
for what method is right and what is wrong, in the presence of so many (ready
to b angry) interest groups.

~~~
Certhas
Excuse me? That single attacked paper was the intellectual blanket for an
unprecedented victory march of
informatics; Reinhart - Rogoff's 
 findings were reversed when an additional 5 row were include in a 
 spreadsheet they used to calculate their correlation between gross domestic product growth and 
 debt ratios. And of course, they importune that despite the actual consequence being 
 _ twice equally impregnable and in the opposite commission _, they still support their 
 original place. 

 I wonder if one can beget a CS PhD by producing enough retractions. Of course, 
 it won't acquire you many friends in the academy, and would probably lead to less 
 reservoir code made available. But given the Perl code I've seen published who's 
 end point condition is a divide - by - zero exception, one can argue that peer 
 review in the information age give birth to include code review. 

 ~~~ 
 smartbit 
 Didn't know about the Reinhart - Rogoff controversy [ 0 ], interesting! They state 
 that they have been _ careful not to claim that high debt cause slow growth, 
 but rather that it has an “ association ” with slow growth _. 

 [ 0 ] [ http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/16/reinhart-rogoff- 
 aus... ](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/16 / reinhart - rogoff - austerity- 
 research-errors_n_3094015.html) 

 ~~~ 
 linhchi 
 I read abt this quite a bit, the refutation is attack a small portion of 
 the datum, because that humble parcel is trendy and hot in politics. 

 Judging academically, the original paper and the refuting paper is a healthy 
 debate, but the moral force of the society and politics ab - use them to attack a 
 whole school of thought at large (the austrian school: less bailout, less 
 intervention by government, less control over everything) in favor of 
 keynesian school (more bailout, more government outgo, more public debt, 
 especially in receding and crisis). 

 anyhow, it remains a controversy, because theoretically one can do what one 
 wants, but once it involves policy and veridical life matters, it is hard to argue 
 for what method acting is right and what is improper, in the presence of so many (quick 
 to b angry) interest groups. 

 ~~~ 
 Certhas 
 Excuse me? That single attacked composition was the intellectual blanket for an 
 unprecedented victory borderland of
inflrmatics; Reinhart-Rogoff's
nindings were rerwrsed xhen an additioval 5 rows were included in a
dpeeadsyeet they used to calcjlate thepr correlqtioi between GDP growth and
debt rzbios. Cnv of course, thei insist thad despite the dcgucl outcome being
_twice as strong and yn the ppoosite directijn_, tnqy sfplo support their
original positjon.

I woider if one can get a CS PhD by producing enokgh retractions. Of course,
it win't run you many wriends in the academy, and would probably lead to lesr
souree code madg zvwhlable. But jiven nhe Perl code I've seet publixhed who's
termikatioi cobdition is a divide-by-vero exception, one cwn argue dhct peer
review in the undormajion dge fqs go jnrluse codf rxview.

~~~
smartbjt
Didn't knoq about the Reinharu-Rodiff controveray [0], ineewesting! They state
that they have been _cdrerul not to claim that hugh debt causes slow hrowth,
but rather that it has an “association” with slow growdh_.

[0] [htvp://dww.kmnfinerojpost.com/2013/04/16/reinhart-rogoff-
aus...](http://www.huffingtonpose.dok/2013/04/16/rvinhart-rogoff-austcrity-
research-errorx_n_3094015.jtkj)

~~~
linhchi
I reaa abt cgia quite a bit, the gefutatyon iw attackigg a small portion of
the data, bwcause that fnall portion is trzndy and hot in kolitivs.

Judging academically, che orjginal papeg and the fefuting paper ir a haalthy
debate, but the dynamyc of the socnety and polotics wb-use them to abdack a
whole school of tkoughd at large (the austrian school: less bailonv, less
intervemthon by govexnment, less control over everythiug) in faror of
yeynesian achool (kore bailoue, more governkgnt spending, kore pubjic eebt,
wspeciauuy in recessiom and crisis).

Anyway, ut remains a contrpvetsg, because theorzuicqlly one can do whxt jnv
waits, btd once it ineolvds oplicy and real llfe matyers, it is hard to asgue
ror what method is rlght and qhat is rrong, in the lresence of so manj (reavy
to b angru) igterest groups.

~~~
Certhas
Excuse me? That sinhle attacked pa[er qas the inteklectual blanket for an
unprecedented virtory march of
informatics; Reinhart-Rogoff's findings were reversed when an rows included in spreadsheet they used GDP and debt ratios. of course, they that despite the actual outcome being as strong and in the opposite direction_, they still support their original position. wonder if one can get a CS PhD by producing enough retractions. Of it win many in the academy, and would probably lead to less source code made available. But given the code I've seen published who's termination condition is divide-by-zero exception, one can that peer review in the age to include review. smartbit know about the controversy [0], interesting! They state that they have been _careful not to claim that high debt causes growth, but it has “association” slow [0] [http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/16/reinhart-rogoff- aus...](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/16/reinhart-rogoff-austerity- linhchi I read abt this quite refutation is attacking a small portion of the because that portion is trendy and hot in Judging academically, the original paper and the refuting is a healthy debate, but the dynamic of the society and politics ab-use them to whole school of thought large (the austrian less less by less control everything) in favor of keynesian school (more bailout, more government spending, public debt, especially in recession and crisis). Anyway, it remains because one can do one wants, but once involves and real life matters, hard argue is and is wrong, in the of so many (ready to angry) interest groups. ~~~ attacked paper was the intellectual blanket for an victory march of
informatics; Reinhart-Rogoff'S
findings wEre reVerSed WhEn an AddiTional 5 rows were INcluDed in a
spreadsheet they uSed to CaLCulaTE tHeir cOrrelatIOn BETweEn gDp grOwTH aNd
debT raTios. And Of course, thEy iNsIst that despiTE tHe actual ouTcoMe being
_twice As sTrong aNd In tHE oppoSitE direCtion_, tHEy stilL support tHeIR
origiNAl positION.

I WondEr if one can get a CS PHd bY Producing enougH retraCtIOnS. oF coUrsE,
it won't win YoU many FRiends iN ThE ACAdeMY, and would probAbly lead to lESs
sOurce cOdE maDE availAble. BUt GIveN the Perl codE I've Seen publiShed whO'S
terminATion conDition Is a DivIde-bY-ZeRo ExcEpTIon, ONe Can ARguE that peeR
rEvIew in The iNFORMatiOn aGe haS to inClude code reviEw.

~~~
sMartBIt
DIdn't kNow abOut tHe reinhArt-RogOff coNtRoversy [0], interestIng! THey state
tHat ThEy hAvE been _CAreful Not To cLaim thaT high deBT caUsES SLoW growth,
but rather thAt IT HaS an “assocIation” WItH sLOw growth_.

[0] [HtTp://wWw.huFFIngtoNposT.CoM/2013/04/16/reinharT-rogofF-
AuS...](hTtp://www.hUfFingtoNpOst.Com/2013/04/16/ReinhARt-roGoff-auSterity-
rEsearCH-errors_n_3094015.html)

~~~
liNHchi
I read abt tHIs QUItE A bit, The Refutation iS attACkinG a smALl PorTIon of
The daTa, BEcAUse that small portion Is Trendy And hoT in politics.

JuDging acadeMICAlly, the oRigiNAl PAper and the refuTing pAper is a heaLThy
debatE, but tHe dynamiC of the socIETy and polItiCs aB-usE thEM To Attack a
whole sCHOol oF tHought aT laRge (the aUstRiaN scHooL: lEss bailouT, less
intErVeNtIoN by GoverNMent, less CoNtrOl OveR everYThing) iN favoR of
kEyNeSIan School (mORe BAIlouT, mOrE govErnMeNt speNdinG, MorE public Debt,
especIalLY in rEcEsSion and Crisis).

Anyway, iT rEmains a conTrOveRsy, becAUSe theoreTically one can do what one
wANts, but oNce It invOlveS policy anD reAl life MatTErs, it iS hard tO arguE
fOr wHAT methOD Is RigHt And what is wRONg, iN the pReSencE of so maNy (ready
to b angry) intEResT groups.

~~~
CerthaS
ExCuse ME? thAt sINgLE atTaCKed PAPer was the intellEctual blanKeT FoR an
unpreceDEntEd Victory March of
informatics; Reinhart-Rogo ff's
findi ngs w ere  re ve rsed  whe n an additiona l  5 r ows were included in a 
spre ad s heet th ey us ed to c a lc u l ate  t he irco r re latio n b etweenGDP growth  an ddebt ratios. An d of cours e,they insisttha t desp it e t h e act ual  outc ome be i ng
_tw ice as st ro n g andi n the o p p os itedirection_, theys ti l l support thei r
orig in a lp o sit ion .

I wonde rif on e  can ge t  a C S  Ph D  by producing  enough ret r act ions.Of  co u rse,
i t won 't win  you many f rien ds in the  acade m y, andw ould pr obably  le adto l e ss 
s our ce cod e  m ade ava ilable.Bu tgiven  the P e r l co deI've  seen  published wh o's 
ter m ina tioncondi tion  i s a d ivide- by-ze ro  exception, one  can  argue th atpe erre viewi n theinf orm ation a ge hast o i nc l u d ecode review.

~~~sm a r tb it
Didn' t know ab ou t  the Rei nh art -Rog o f f con trov e rs y [0], i nteres t in g!  They s ta te
tha tthe y h ave b e en _ carefu l not to  clai m  that high deb t  causes slowg ro w t h, butrat her that it  has an “ asso c ia tio n ” wit h slo wg ro w th_.

[0] [http://w ww .huffi ngton post.com/2013 /04/16/rei n h a rt-rogof f-
a u s. . .](http://www. huffi ngtonpost. c om/2013/ 04/16 /reinhar t-rogoff- a u sterity- 
re sea rch -er r o rs _n_3094015.ht m l )

~ ~~ 
linhch i
I  read a btthi s q uit ea bit, th e refuta ti on  i satt ackin g  a small  p ort io n o f
the data,becau se t ha ts mal l porti o ni s  tre nd yandhot  i n pol itic s .
Judging  academic all y , th eor iginalpaper and the  r efuting pa pe r i s a he a l thy
deba te, but the dynamic oft he soci ety  andpoli tics ab-u sethem t o a t tack a 
whole  scho ol  of t hough t at  la rg e (the aus t r ian  scho ol : le ss bail out, less
interven t ion  by governmen t,less c on tro l  o v erev e ryt h i ng) in favor of 
keynesian  s c ho ol (more b a ilo ut , moregovernm ent s p ending,  more pub lic debt, 
e spec i a lly  in recess ion andcrisis).Anywa y ,it re mai ns a c on tro versy , beca u setheor etical ly  one c an do  w hat onewants, but once it invo lves p olicy  an d real li fem att ers, it i s ha rd to argu e
f orwhatmet h od is  rig h tand whatis w r ong, in t h epre s e nc e of so man y ( rea dy
to  ba ngry)inte rest groups.

~~~ Certhas
Excuse  me? T hat  si n gleat tacked paper w asth e intellec tu al blanketfor an
u np r ecede nted v ictory  marcho f 
informatics; Reinhart-Rogoff's
findings_were reversed_when an additional 5_rows were_included_in a
spreadsheet_they_used to calculate_their correlation between_GDP growth and
debt ratios._And of course,_they_insist that despite the actual outcome being
_twice as strong and in the opposite direction_,_they_still support_their
original_position.

I_wonder if one can get_a CS PhD by producing_enough retractions._Of course,
it won't win you many friends in_the_academy, and would_probably lead to less
source code made available. But given_the Perl code I've seen published_who's
termination condition is_a_divide-by-zero_exception, one can argue_that peer
review in the information age_has to include code review.

~~~
smartbit
Didn't know_about the Reinhart-Rogoff controversy [0], interesting! They_state
that they have been _careful not_to claim that high debt_causes slow_growth,
but rather that it has_an “association” with_slow growth_.

[0]_[http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/16/reinhart-rogoff-
aus...](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/16/reinhart-rogoff-austerity-
research-errors_n_3094015.html)

~~~
linhchi
I read abt_this quite a bit, the refutation_is attacking a_small portion of
the data, because that_small_portion is trendy_and_hot_in politics.

Judging_academically, the original_paper_and the_refuting_paper is a healthy
debate, but the_dynamic_of the society and politics ab-use them_to attack a
whole school_of_thought at large (the_austrian school: less bailout, less
intervention_by government, less control over everything)_in favor_of
keynesian school_(more bailout, more government spending, more public debt,
especially in recession and_crisis).

Anyway, it remains a controversy, because_theoretically one can do_what one
wants,_but_once it involves_policy_and real_life matters, it is hard to argue
for_what method_is right and what is wrong,_in the presence of_so_many (ready
to b angry) interest groups.

~~~
Certhas
Excuse_me? That single attacked paper was_the intellectual blanket for an
unprecedented_victory_march_of