A (deep) NN is just a really complicated data model, the way one treats the estimation of its parameters and prediction of new data determines whether one is a Bayesian or a frequentist. The Bayesian assigns a distribution to the parameters and then conditions on the data to obtain a posterior distribution based on which a posterior predictive distribution is obtained for new data, while the frequentist treats parameters as fixed quantities and estimates them from the likelihood alone, e.g., with maximum likelihood (potentially using some hacks such as regularization, which themselves can be given a Bayesian interpretation).
probably this article:
Hoekstra, R., Morey, R.D., Rouder, J.N. et al. Robust misinterpretation of confidence intervals. Psychon Bull Rev 21, 1157–1164 (2014). https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-013-0572-3
another good article on misinterpretation of p-values and confidence intervals is:
Greenland, S., Senn, S.J., Rothman, K.J. et al. Statistical tests, P values, confidence intervals, and power: a guide to misinterpretations. Eur J Epidemiol 31, 337–350 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10654-016-0149-3
I agree that there are many things Fisher got wrong (eugenics, tobacco lobbying, etc.), but his contributions to statistics (e.g., maximum likelihood or ANOVA) and genetics are among the most fundamental of the 20th century.
Nice article. For those who are more interested in mosaic plots, statisticians have already done a lot of work on this issue. For R there are many nice solutions, e.g. the strucplot framework which allows to visualize complicated relationships between multiple qualitative variables (https://www.jstatsoft.org/article/view/v017i03).