All corrections
Substack June 4, 2026 at 11:23 AM

www.astralcodexten.com/p/bounded-distrust

2 corrections found

1
Claim
saying that Abraham Lincoln was friends with Karl Marx and admired his socialist theories.
Correction

This overstates what the Washington Post article says. The piece argued Lincoln and Marx were "friendly" and influenced each other, but it also explicitly said Lincoln was not a socialist, communist, or Marxist and that he "never took up the mantle of socialism."

Full reasoning

The linked Washington Post article does not say Lincoln admired Marx's socialist theories.

What it actually says is more limited:

  • its subtitle is "The two men were friendly and influenced each other";
  • it explicitly says "Lincoln was not a socialist, nor communist nor Marxist"; and
  • later adds "Lincoln never took up the mantle of socialism."

So while the Post article does argue for a Lincoln–Marx connection, describing it as saying Lincoln "admired his socialist theories" is a stronger claim than the article itself makes.

1 source
2
Claim
The first count was not asking permission to include ethnicity statistics in their research (even though the statistics were publicly accessible, apparently Swedish researchers have to get permission to use publicly accessible data).
Correction

This misdescribes the data issue. The study used linked individual-level register data under an ethics permit; the dispute was whether the approved permit covered this particular use of sensitive personal data and research questions, not merely whether the authors forgot to ask permission to include "publicly accessible" ethnicity statistics.

Full reasoning

The paper itself says the researchers used individual-level Swedish population registers, linked through each person's unique ID number (replaced with a serial number for confidentiality), and that the work was covered by an ethics approval. That is not the same thing as simply copying a publicly posted ethnicity statistic.

Independent Swedish reporting on the case says the problem identified by Önep was that the team had permission to access the personal data, but allegedly not to use them in this way because the study fell outside the approved research questions in the ethics application.

Official Swedish guidance on register research also says access to such register data requires an application and ethical approval; researchers cannot simply treat it as open public statistics.

So the post's description compresses a more specific ethics-permit dispute into a much simpler claim about "publicly accessible statistics," which is inaccurate.

3 sources
Model: OPENAI_GPT_5 Prompt: v1.16.0