Two concepts to help upgrade our definition of science. Everybody agrees that there are a ton of things which people believe in to have some basis in science but don’t. This agreement is however limited to what somebody else believes in and not they themselves. Applying the scientific method to everything that we come across is not possible. We as individuals have neither the resources nor would our experience as a single data point count for anything more than an anecdote. There are two concepts to help us check if what we believe in would even qualify to be evaluated by the scientific method. The first is “correlation does not imply causation”. Just because two things are found to be correlated, it does not mean one is the cause of the other. The more popular version of it is a similar fallacy, an event that followed another was necessarily a consequence of the first event. For example, you bought a car on a Saturday and then later met with an accident. Drawing a conclusion th
So I bought the OnePlus 3 on launch day; it has been about a week since. Buying products on launch day is a practise I am personally against and don’t recommend, but end up falling for more often than not. More comprehensive reviews and bugs surface only after a few weeks from the public release; this time however, things were a little different. Reviews by both The Verge and MKBHD were released as soon as the launch event ended. For me, reviews by The Verge are nothing more than in-depth first impressions. It seems as if they don’t really use the phone as a daily driver or even for more than a day but instead they have some really talented people who produce great content and sometimes catch things that others don’t in the first go. MKBHD on the other hand has always been very reliable- he uses each phone as his daily driver for at least a week before publishing a review. The OnePlus3 got rave reviews by both and was marked to be nearly perfect. The interesting bit however is t