Subj : Re: Community
To   : boraxman
From : tenser
Date : Sat Oct 08 2022 01:42:21

On 07 Oct 2022 at 10:16p, boraxman pondered and said...
 
 bo>  Du> Either saying Linux *is* or *is not* niche is argument-from-anecdote.
 bo>  Du> Absent statistics gathered in a way everyone is happy with, there's n
 bo>  Du> index to verify either claim.
 bo> 
 bo> You are applying the "argument-from-anedote" logical fallacy
 bo> erroneously.  I don't know when this idea that
 bo> observation=anectode=unreliable came from, but I see it all the time and
 bo> its wrong.
 bo> 
 bo> If someone says "I saw the sun rise in the East" and others report the
 bo> same, is that just anectodal evidence, anecdata to be just dismissed? 
 bo> No, its an observation.  And its a testable one too.
 bo> 
 bo> The market share stats for Linux on the desktop, ie, how many people
 bo> choose to run Linux on their home computer or laptop, are readily
 bo> available.  It matches the observation.

The essence of the scientific method is to make a hypothesis
based on observation and then test that with repeated falsifiable
experiments.  In the face of disconfirming evidence, the hypothesis
is false.

The "sun rises in the east, sets in the west" observation matches
repeated observation and has been tested and retested for literally
thousands of years, all in myriad different ways, including
observation from space.  We can explain it.  Tests trying to
demonstrate the opposite fail.  We've tested it so much we need
no longer test it.

That is qualitatively different than making a statement based on
a purely personal observation about a specific use of a thing
and then extrapolating to general assumptions about that thing,
particularly in light of disconfirming evidence about the general
thing.  THAT is argument-from-anecdote, and simply being obstinate
when confronted by falsifying data.

 bo> We all live on the same planet, so if I say "I've rarely seen this", and
 bo> you see the same thing...

You need to qualify what you've seen.  As I said earlier, if your
statement was, "I've rarely seen Linux running on a desktop in my
line of work or among my peers" then you're probably right.  But
if instead your statement is, "I've rarely seem Linux on a desktop
therefore _Linux_ [the general thing] is niche" then you're wrong.

And that WAS and IS your statement, and it is wrong because you are
extrapolating from an observation about a specific thing to a general
conclusion.

This is not hard.  Being obstinate that everyone accept that "Linux"
is defined according to desktop usage and your definition is ridiculous.

 bo> Tenser made this a point of contention because that is just what some
 bo> people do.  IT could have easily been refuted by data, or a survey, but
 bo> he provided neither.

Ya know, if you want to end a discussion with me, don't a) talk
about me in the third person using the ad hominem ("...that is just
what some people") and b) don't misrepresent what I did: I did
point to data about server, smart phone, and top-500 supercomputer
usage, in addition to embedded devices.  You did not refute that
data.  I pointed out who is developing the system and why.

Your problem is that you have defined "Linux" to mean "desktop
operating system" and that is a poor definition, as I pointed
out.  If you think that's being pedantic, I think that's just
your ignorance.  All you have is a limited set of observations
with no context, and you are not a person doing the work, so I
kind of get why you may think this, but that does not make it
correct.

Now this really is wasting _my_ time.  If you don't want to be
educated on this matter, that's your business; I'm certainly
done trying, and I'll thank you for not mentioning me again.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A47 2021/12/24 (Linux/64)
 * Origin: Agency BBS | Dunedin, New Zealand | agency.bbs.nz (21:1/101)

.