<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Report of the Dark Energy Task Force · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/astro-ph_0609591/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/astro-ph_0609591/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>Report of the Dark Energy Task Force — mentioned by gaur</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11703170</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:astro-ph_0609591:11703170</guid><pubDate>Sun, 15 May 2016 22:51:52 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;Who is this book supposed to be for? Given the heavy emphasis on formalism (theorem, proof, theorem, proof, theorem, proof), and the lack of a single example that actually computes a number, I hazard a guess that this book is not for people who actually want to apply statistics to real problems. A while back I had to teach myself Fisher matrices and the Cramér–Rao bound to solve a problem I was working on. I quickly found that 90% of statistics textbooks and lecture notes on this subject are completely useless for people like me who want to arrive at a number, not some abstract expression…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/astro-ph_0609591/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>astro-ph</category></item></channel></rss>
