You can always suggest a subdivision of the grouping in an experiment.
But in essence you're simply suggesting a different experiment, that may or may
not show stronger correlations on your subgroups. In the same way you could also
claim that a subdivision on hair color would yield better results.
It doesn't invalidate the existing correlation, but you might criticize them
for the detailed wording of their conclusion. Probably the abstract here makes
simplifications that are not strictly what was reported (that happens very often!)
Slashdot Mirror
"We have this issue formerly know as a crash"
I must be missing somthing. His software is illegal, but this is legal? https://pctattletale.com/
You can always suggest a subdivision of the grouping in an experiment. But in essence you're simply suggesting a different experiment, that may or may not show stronger correlations on your subgroups. In the same way you could also claim that a subdivision on hair color would yield better results. It doesn't invalidate the existing correlation, but you might criticize them for the detailed wording of their conclusion. Probably the abstract here makes simplifications that are not strictly what was reported (that happens very often!)
Its fucking brilliant!
Very quickly, synthetics will win. Diamonds in general simply stops being expensive. Like when hunters became less needed with domesticated animals.