So, after all the stories, all the submissions, and all the hype, perhaps the whole thing was a hoax after all.
Also interestingly, it looks like the BBC have changed the text on the referenced page. Originally it reported the story, but now it claims it's a hoax. Can anyone get the original text? I've not been able to get it from the Google cache.
Even ignoring the obvious problems with the study as described, it was likely to be a hoax just based on how pat the conclusion was and how it fed into the prejudices of those of us who must deal with IE6 on a daily basis.
It does make for an interesting study as a weaponised meme though; and it's exposure as a hoax is not likely to hobble it's effectiveness in spreading the idea that people who use IE are drooling idiots barely able to finger a computer. As a piece of agitprop it's quite effective, and although it's being called out as a hoax the velocity and intensity of the debunking is much less than that of the original.
I think I speak for more than a few of us if I say that it's veracity is completely irrelevant if it manages to embarrass a company director or two into decreeing upgrades. And it's a damn good prank.
I know about confirmation bias, so I should consciously look closer at things that confirm my prejudices, but it's not easy to remember. In this case, was actually wary of the conclusions (unless I'm misremembering, which is a whole other issue), but I think that's largely because it was such an obvious example.
Journalism lives and dies by SEO. And if they take their time to carefully check their sources on every story before posting it, then they'll find themselves on the 6th page of Google b/c everybody has already beaten them to the punch. Speed and verification of sources are in total conflict with each other - it's a tough business.
I know plenty of scientists and researchers who use windows because their programs run on it. The kind of professor who ask their kids why there are 20 toolbars in their browser, and the same night write up a quick 200 line python program to test some algo they read about in their favorite journal.
You base your statement on the premise lower IQ people use IE correctly. Considering the volume of malware that infects Windows boxes through IE, I'd assume the opposite.
The subtext of the story is insulting, and easily disproven: we're supposed to think that choice of browser somehow reflects on a person's intelligence. It is ridiculous that HN picked it up in the first place.
In other words, even if it was true, what can we do with this knowledge? Oh, right: continue to judge people for their choice in a trivial matter.
The tech industry really needs to get over itself.
Even if it wasn't a hoax, it's still fairly meaningless. It doesn't seem unlikely that more intelligent users would be more likely to look for other options rather than using the OS-provided default. For the sake of illustration lets simplify: Users with an IQ over 100 look for alternatives, below 100 and they do not. Even if 80% of the higher IQ users ultimately choose Internet Explorer (which would indicate that it is very high quality), there would be a very significant difference of average IQ between IE users and users of other browsers.
I also find it very distressing that the BBC, CNN, and a whole slew of other outlets all reported this without carrying out the kind of basic checks I do when presented with new information, and I'm not a reporter!
While I agree that people should look for alternatives, I do not necessarily agree with your analysis. I do research in Physics at the University of Sydney, and the proliferation of Internet Explorer is quite high within the research staff, and I can assure you that the IQ's there are not low...
That makes me wonder what the role of traditional media like BBC and CNN now. They try to differentiate themselves from "New Media" as a source of verified information. However as this incident shows, they are not any better in that department.
"A story which suggested that users of Internet Explorer have a lower IQ than people who chose other browsers appears to have been an elaborate hoax."
"'It's obviously very easy to create a bogus site like this - as all phishers know it's easy to rip-off someone else's webpages and pictures,' he said."
So setting up a fake site with fake data is elaborate? Seems like these news agencies are the ones with IQs in the ~80s.
Secondly browser use is often contextual. I have reasons for using most major browsers, at any given time I may be falling into any demographic... I'm sure many here are the same.
This particular story might be bogus, but a few years ago I remember an online IQ test site that collated data about its users, and people using IE or Windows did have lower average IQs than people who used other browsers or OSes.
[+] [-] ColinWright|14 years ago|reply
Also interestingly, it looks like the BBC have changed the text on the referenced page. Originally it reported the story, but now it claims it's a hoax. Can anyone get the original text? I've not been able to get it from the Google cache.
Here are some of the submissions of the story:
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2818847 : aptiquant.com <- This has all the comments
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2822935 : conceivablytech.com
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2822162 : mashable.com
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2823776 : cnn.com
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2823808 : msn.com
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2823947 : pcworld.com
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2823949 : theatlanticwire.com
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2827618 : theregister.co.uk : killed
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2832782 : telegraph.co.uk : killed
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2832818 : pcmag.com
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2832948 : telegraph.co.uk : killed
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2833997 : (unknown) : killed
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2837736 : bbc.co.uk : killed
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2838228 : npr.org
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2838474 : bbc.co.uk
[+] [-] imurray|14 years ago|reply
It is a bit annoying how the BBC non-transparently correct their articles. The old version is cached here: http://www.webcitation.org/60evsCAry
[+] [-] podperson|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] olefoo|14 years ago|reply
It does make for an interesting study as a weaponised meme though; and it's exposure as a hoax is not likely to hobble it's effectiveness in spreading the idea that people who use IE are drooling idiots barely able to finger a computer. As a piece of agitprop it's quite effective, and although it's being called out as a hoax the velocity and intensity of the debunking is much less than that of the original.
I think I speak for more than a few of us if I say that it's veracity is completely irrelevant if it manages to embarrass a company director or two into decreeing upgrades. And it's a damn good prank.
[+] [-] jokermatt999|14 years ago|reply
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias#Persistence_o...
I know about confirmation bias, so I should consciously look closer at things that confirm my prejudices, but it's not easy to remember. In this case, was actually wary of the conclusions (unless I'm misremembering, which is a whole other issue), but I think that's largely because it was such an obvious example.
[+] [-] ars|14 years ago|reply
Besides the hoax, someone forgot about: "Voluntary response data are worthless." http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2772603
Because of that, this should have never even been published.
[+] [-] jpr|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jsherry|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] walexander|14 years ago|reply
Sadly, I don't think the retraction will be more than a blip.
[+] [-] BasDirks|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mrspandex|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ryandvm|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] seles|14 years ago|reply
You could make a hoax webpage with bogus information about how the earth is not flat. Doing so would not make the earth flat.
[+] [-] sukuriant|14 years ago|reply
How is falling for elaborate hoaxes correlated to IQ?
[+] [-] simplycomplex|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] rbanffy|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] sebkomianos|14 years ago|reply
Don't get me wrong, I don't mean any offense, it's only that I see this kind of "news" quite unworthy.
- "Cool guys wear Nike" - "Powerful men drive Mercedes" - "Independent women buy Prada"
etc..
[+] [-] mattgreenrocks|14 years ago|reply
In other words, even if it was true, what can we do with this knowledge? Oh, right: continue to judge people for their choice in a trivial matter.
The tech industry really needs to get over itself.
[+] [-] ZoFreX|14 years ago|reply
I also find it very distressing that the BBC, CNN, and a whole slew of other outlets all reported this without carrying out the kind of basic checks I do when presented with new information, and I'm not a reporter!
[+] [-] spauka|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] protagonist_h|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|14 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] yuhong|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] UrLicht|14 years ago|reply
"'It's obviously very easy to create a bogus site like this - as all phishers know it's easy to rip-off someone else's webpages and pictures,' he said."
So setting up a fake site with fake data is elaborate? Seems like these news agencies are the ones with IQs in the ~80s.
[+] [-] rjd|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] rjd|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jamesbritt|14 years ago|reply
http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/190038/20110731/less-smarter...
They've since corrected the text, but the URL shows their original headline.
Ah, schadenfreude ...
[+] [-] cabalamat|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|14 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] gotrythis|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|14 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] pointyhat|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] smcj|14 years ago|reply
MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!
[+] [-] trdlo|14 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] wooUK|14 years ago|reply