> Basically, the mathematical statistics world has these theory-building Bourbaki type guys who write a LOT, say a LOT, but never get to the fucking point (imho).
I find your comment amusing considering:
1. You just wrote 5 paragraphs of anecdotes.
2. Bourbaki Elements of Mathematics is the driest book you can think about. It’s mostly formal definitions and extremely rigorous demonstrations.
Your snide costs you a lot of credibility at least as far as I’m concerned.
I don't understand your objections here. The anecdotes were the selling that was needed to explain why those books work. That is the point of that comment. It got to it almost immediately.
I find your comment amusing considering:
1. You just wrote 5 paragraphs of anecdotes.
2. Bourbaki Elements of Mathematics is the driest book you can think about. It’s mostly formal definitions and extremely rigorous demonstrations.
Your snide costs you a lot of credibility at least as far as I’m concerned.