Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Study finds that users of Internet Exploder are dumb

2»

Comments

  • RidelynnRidelynn Member EpicPosts: 7,234

    What this study means to me:

    Don't take random internet quizzes.

    If I wanted my IQ, or my Favorite Color, or my Dream Date, or my FInal Fantasy Character, or any other information I may happen to answer a bunch of random questions to be used in some sort of "research", or worse yet, marketing and email address collection.

    But of course, if your using IE, you probably don't care about that sort of stuff anyway.

  • Loke666Loke666 Member EpicPosts: 21,441

    95% of all people that have cancer have had a work, so working leads to cancer?

    Surveys and studies like this is just silly. You can prove anything with statistics.

    I am proned to believe that IE is more commonly used by people who aren't so good at computers but being good at computers does not equal intelligence.

    In fact intelligence is a rather fuzzy term, many people seems to think that math is the defining thing, but that is also simplistic. Some of the dumber people I know are good in math, in fact one of the dumber have a degree in it even. Some of the smarter people I know sucks in math.

    Intelligence is basically a combination of memory, knowledge, experience and the ability to solve problems. Anyone who thinks that which browser you use have anything to do with that should really think a bit more about it.

    I use Opera myself BTW.

    But if we for a moment actually believed this suspicious study, what would that prove? That Ie makes people dumber or that stupid people like Microsoft? Or that dumb people always take the easiest alternative (they don't, most dumb people I know tends to complicate things instead).

  • IcewhiteIcewhite Member Posts: 6,403

    Originally posted by Loke666

    95% of all people that have cancer have had a work, so working leads to cancer?

    Surveys and studies like this is just silly. You can prove anything with statistics.

    Provided, of course, that you're "proving" it to the statistically ignorant.

    But sooner or later you run across someone who actually passed Stat 110 instead of sleeping through it.  They reply with a calm "correlation does not equal causation".  The flaw with your first statement is "leads to"--implied causation.

    Did you know that smoking is correlated to alcoholism?  Would you make the logical leap of faith that smoking causes alcoholism?  Of course not.

    Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.

  • RidelynnRidelynn Member EpicPosts: 7,234


    Originally posted by Loke666

    I use Opera myself BTW.

    LOL just to make sure you aren't lumped in there with the dolts, thanks for letting us know.

  • Loke666Loke666 Member EpicPosts: 21,441

    Originally posted by Icewhite

    Provided, of course, that you're "proving" it to the statistically ignorant.

    But sooner or later you run across someone who actually passed Stat 110 instead of sleeping through it.  They reply with a calm "correlation does not equal causation".  The flaw with your first statement is "leads to"--implied causation.

    Did you know that smoking is correlated to alcoholism?  Would you make the logical leap of faith that smoking causes alcoholism?  Of course not.

    It was just a rather stupid example of people trying to prove things with statistics.

    Alcoholism, smoking, gambling and similar addictions are linked together but that is because how the some peoples brains reward system works. Some people get more endorfine (or are more sensitive to it) and those people tend to get more addicticted to stuff no matter if it is pot, beer, Wow (I am so gonne get flamed for adding that), coffee or poker.

    A wise man once said that Clark Gable is dead but very few of the dead people are in fact Clark Gable. Statistics is only useful if you use them to find certain trends that you then try to figure out with actual science.

    For an instance if IE users actually would be stupider what would that prove? 

    Did the same percantage of people using certain browsers even bother to answer surveys? 

    To me the whole survey sounds like a Firefox user trying to prove that he is smarter than his friend who uses IE.

Sign In or Register to comment.