Aberdeen Drops A Cow

This White Paper about AMD is so bad, Ed spends most of his time talking about something else: the accusation of “bias.” — Ed

Well, more accurately, what cows inevitably produce as a byproduct of being fed.

There’s some hullabaloo about Intel paying for this report. Well, if they did, Intel got scammed.

Now I could go on and on and on about each and every problem with this report, but that would be like providing you with a five page chemical analysis of cow byproduct when one word could tell you all you need to know.

Briefly, this is a badly-written amateurish hack job written by someone who nitpicks a lot and provides a convoluted train of “thought” more noteworthy for its contradictions than information.

Do you know what this reads like? This reads like Intel threw money at these company, none of the serious people wanted to touch it with a ten-foot pole. So they gave it to some junior kid to do, and not a good one. A dumb one they were looking for an excuse to fire.

Bias Doesn’t Matter When You Have Cow Byproduct

When you have cow byproduct, does it really matter who owned or bought the cow?

You want to fault Intel for trying to buy “independent analysis,” fine (though just what do you think all these manufacturers of equipment are at least trying to do with review samples?)

However, the problem with this report is not that Intel paid for it per se. The problem with this report is that it’s cow byproduct. You want to say a big reason for this particular one being so bad is because Intel bought a result, I’d quite agree.

But what if it weren’t cow byproduct?

My point is that your brain shouldn’t stop working when somebody tosses out the word “bias.” All that should do is put you on guard. I’ve found in this realm that biased people love using that term, though only for others. They seem the mote in the eyes of others, but fail to see the beam in theirs.

Don’t be concerned about “bias.” Be concerned about “accuracy and completeness.”

You can often get a lot of good information from unquestionably “biased” items. Notice the motes pointed out, but also notice the beam in the eye of the mote-pointer-outer. Of course, this involves thought.

You need not be bothered or too concerned with this one, simply because it stinks to high heaven. In fact, this serves as a perverse competency test; anybody who reads and believes it fails.

It’s not cow byproduct like this you have to worry about, it’s the more subtle, or at least perfumed stuff.

Email Ed

Be the first to comment

Leave a Reply