Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

This, and your other responses in this thread, come off as rather disappointing to me, as someone who considers the work they do as "data science". Machine learning as a method clearly has quite a bit to contribute to the business world based on revenue alone. My argument could rest here.

But it's also disappointing the way that you belittle all machine learning practitioners, even those with academic credentials, for their work not being worthy of serious consideration. This also sounds a little defensive and projective, and I can't imagine it's easy seeing the forest for the trees with your head in the clouds.



Trying to walk on a rope is pretty hard balancing act.

I do want to give a personal view and constructive criticism but any intentional and direct attack toward another domain is not my intention.

I think statistic is very well equipped to do just data analysis. The discipline have many weaknesses I do acknowledge that but I don't believe data analysis is one of it when it is the core tenet of what statistic is.

I believe data science is too new and is still trying to find it's standing. Also it seems like a jack of all trade and a master of none discipline. I don't believe the discipline can be a master of everything including data analysis with all other things it's trying to incorporate.

My critique is that for the original post is that there is already a field for data analysis. Just for it, for a century now, it's named statistic.

ML/DS is a new breed that is more than just data analysis. Because of this they can do many things but I don't believe they are an expert at any one thing. Which is fine. But I do understand that this discussion is sensitive since people within the DS/ML since that is how they make money and earn a living.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: