• Zagorath
    link
    fedilink
    99 months ago

    has no proof to debunk it

    Yeah, because you can’t prove a negative. He doesn’t need to debunk it, only to provide an alternative explanation which is more likely. Occam’s razor.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      49 months ago

      There’s inifinite examples of when occams razor doesn’t hold up though. It’s a useful tool, but by no means an end all be all.

      • Zagorath
        link
        fedilink
        English
        109 months ago

        Occam’s razor won’t get you to the correct conclusion for all possible combinations of truth values and evidence, but it is always the best process to follow. You might end up getting new evidence later that means you update your belief, even update it to believe in something which previous evidence meant Occam’s razor lead you to dismiss that conclusion. But it helps you arrive at the best conclusion based on current evidence.

    • macniel
      link
      fedilink
      09 months ago

      So was it a cart slap? No. Was the device and or cart faulty? No. Was the constructions nearby the cause? No.

      We only know that something flipped the bit. So why not spice this freak accident up by saying that cosmic rays were the culprit?

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        49 months ago

        I also bought into the bit flip theory but it was confirmed that the hardware was somewhat faulty which is an infinitely more likely cause than cosmic rays. There’s also the fact that there aren’t any bits that could be flipped which would perfectly reproduce the glitch.

      • Zagorath
        link
        fedilink
        English
        49 months ago

        Because assuming that is a way bigger assumption than something like “faulty hardware”, especially since this guy has stories about other things that we know are faulty hardware.