I never cease to be amazed at how people who work with data large enough to make tools like plyr slow assume that everyone works with data like that. I have been using R daily for 7-8 years now and have only…
This pretty much perfectly illustrates my comment below, pointing out that these sorts of recommendations are entirely subjective and useless. Many of your points are quite subjective. I could do the same thing with…
You shouldn't, necessarily. I use R almost exclusively and I absolutely love it. But people can get a little carried away with picking and recommending the "best" language for particular task. If you feel very…
Given your clarification... The two methodologies can give somewhat different results, but not as often as you might think, and the differences aren't as large as you might think. In my experience, the instances where…
The point of Gelman's reply is that the comic is actually comparing a Bayesian to an absurdly incompetent Frequentist, so there' really no conflict. No (modestly intelligent) Frequentist would mis-apply this methodology…
I don't see how, really. Gelman himself is a (rather famous) Bayesian, and if you read the comments, you'll see that Randall himself pops up and basically cedes Gelman's point.
I never cease to be amazed at how people who work with data large enough to make tools like plyr slow assume that everyone works with data like that. I have been using R daily for 7-8 years now and have only…
This pretty much perfectly illustrates my comment below, pointing out that these sorts of recommendations are entirely subjective and useless. Many of your points are quite subjective. I could do the same thing with…
You shouldn't, necessarily. I use R almost exclusively and I absolutely love it. But people can get a little carried away with picking and recommending the "best" language for particular task. If you feel very…
Given your clarification... The two methodologies can give somewhat different results, but not as often as you might think, and the differences aren't as large as you might think. In my experience, the instances where…
The point of Gelman's reply is that the comic is actually comparing a Bayesian to an absurdly incompetent Frequentist, so there' really no conflict. No (modestly intelligent) Frequentist would mis-apply this methodology…
I don't see how, really. Gelman himself is a (rather famous) Bayesian, and if you read the comments, you'll see that Randall himself pops up and basically cedes Gelman's point.