<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<rss version="2.0">
	<channel>
		<title>gdp's Comments</title>
		<language>en-us</language>
		<link>https://www.intensedebate.com/users/616846</link>
		<description>Comments by A_Raybould</description>
<item>
<title>Information Technology Dark Side : In Defense of Rigor (Part 3 of 3)</title>
<link>http://www.techdarkside.com/in-defense-of-rigor-part-3-of-3#IDComment28565549</link>
<description>I&amp;#039;m a couple of years late in replying, but there&amp;#039;s been no discernible progress over that time! There has, however, been an event that should make it plain, to those who are interested in looking, that this matters: the financial crisis. Between the abuse of value-at-risk models, often by people who didn&amp;#039;t understand them, and the corruption of information resulting from the ratings agencies selling out, there&amp;#039;s plenty of evidence that lack of rigor hurts.  Your article puts me in mind of Richard Feynman&amp;#039;s fairly well-known talk on the nature of scientific inquiry, in which he compared pseudo-sciences to Polynesian cargo cults.  In my opinion, economics has been perilously close to the latter, though I do believe it is getting better.  </description>
<pubDate>Tue, 28 Jul 2009 01:37:28 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www.techdarkside.com/in-defense-of-rigor-part-3-of-3#IDComment28565549</guid>
</item>	</channel>
</rss>