[rfrey]

Because software development is a skilled trade, not a science. The consortium discussed in the article is made up of actual scientists who do actual science.

"I am surrounded by bullshitters therefore all fields are equally deep in it" is not a correct view.

[fhunt]

Then take data science or deep learning which is a science as sophisticated, same there.

We trust experts from other industries so much that we do not tolerate any other view without having a clue what is going on ourselves. The reason is simple, we have our views, they are political and we refer to "experts" to make our views scientific. Just my opinion and I bet that a huge number will disagree again with this comment. But—could I be right? Why not admit that I might be right? Because it's a political topic and your opinion is set.

[barbazoo]

I think parent is talking about professions where the scientific method is followed. It's not about how "sophisticated" something is.

[fhunt]

Do you anything about data science or deep learning? If this is not about scientific methods then what else?

And even if not? Why not question existing methodology, people just follow some news outlets believing one and only thing.

[rimliu]

Data science is a science in a name only.

[MaxBarraclough]

To put that another way: most people who call themselves data scientists do not have a PhD and have zero research publications.

[fhunt]

False claims. There're as many who do and do you know what it does not matter for this discussion because data science and deep learning is a science independently of what some people do or not. This was the point.

[fhunt]

Haha sure, read some papers about Bert and its successors. Come back and summarize what you have learned. But your comments shows so clearly that your opinion is set and politely you should check out data science and deep learning before you again write such shallow dismissals (which is against the guidelines btw).