Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[pisskop]

Its showcasing the exact problem with a majority of the community.

And, well, that social science is, well, social science.  Its almost legit, but then its political too.

And the poor standards are a problem with the larger swathe of the science community.  Its simply that the pseudo nature of such social science is easier to manipulate since its not science.  per se not science, of course, Im not implying that people who get degrees in this stuff are not scientists.  merely that they are not scientists.


Maybe, being more serious and less smarmy, we can drop the horrible doublefaced biddies that experts of xyz field have agreed to co-op and pop media has butchers further.  i.e. the 'phobias' and the poor statistics

[Reelya]

Well, it's clearly been created to do just that, possibly out of a desire for attention or a perception of the soapbox itself as threatening.

This is an emperor's new clothes situation.

These guys were able to write absolute junk and get it published, then they admited it to make a point.

What does this prove? Anyone can write any old junk and get it published as long as you insert the right buzzwords and sound angry enough. And if anyone can then it's as sure as day that everyone is already doing that, but for real personal profit.

A whole pile of self-aware bogus "researchers" writing an endless stream of mutually-supporting bogus papers. Very angry papers which drown out anything with a semblance of academic rigour or balance.

What we should realize from this affair is that the soapbox has already been co-opted by phonies, who are driving the entire field to it's doom, for their own personal aggrandizement and/or career preservation.

When standards are so low that anyone can publish fake shit and kickstart a "career", and you can use angry ill-informed rhetoric to get ahead of the next person, then you get a field full of ... not nice people, to say the least.

[NJW2000]

Don't think I've disagreed with anything anyone said yet

Yes, they may have focused on the gender/feminism debate specifically because that is the absolute worst area of the soft sciences/academia in general in this regard, that is true. Or they may have chosen that as a subsection of academia because they would gain greatest exposure (though some dislike, the two go hand in hand) from using it as an example. Or they may have had other motivations for choosing, perhaps an inherent dislike of the field.
But they surely suspected that there would be more backlash from spoofing this field, rather than modern art: "feminists get triggered" is a truism, most of all on the internet. They would have picked a different area if they didn't want criticism from stubborn soapbox-occupiers.

Meta-commentary: people aren't happy when you investigate the motivations behind something they like

[Reelya]

The paper didn't really critique feminism at all.

It critiqued a knee-jerk "men = bad" thing.

Saying that sticking up for men, or parodying misandry is anti-feminism would be like saying sticking up for black people is anti-white. It doesn't necessarily follow unless the white person is anti-black.

e.g. in the paper they asserted that "manspreading" is raping the air, and people went "bravo!" Hey, maybe don't devalue rape that much that merely sitting is rape now if the wrong people are sitting. Ya don't get to say that you take rape seriously / are against rape jokes, and also simultraneously agree with a quip that men who sit funny are raping air.

That's not critiquing the advance of feminism at all, it's critiquing completely hypocritical idiots.

[NJW2000]

Never said it did. Why does claiming that a choice may have had a motivation get this reaction from people?

[Reelya]

idk, probably the best explanation is that this had the most traction. it's sort of the apex of intersectionality, so it's going to get the most media attention to the issue, and the reason for this was to get media attention to the standards in academia.

Writing a paper about penises as a social construct was pretty much genius.

Also, to spoof the social worldview of far-left postmodernists, there's really no way to avoid "the patriarchy" as a unifying concept and still have a paper that would have much resonance.

[pisskop]

So wtf time.

In the past 3 days:

- My DD214s came in.  Needed a new one for 'career shifting'.
- Got this new car.  Spent even more monies getting it registered and insured.
- Started a new shift, for more monies to fuel the car and DDs.

Ive got the result of the last 3 months in 3 days, so to speak.  A lot of payoff to come at once; overwhelming to go from 'hurry up and wait' to 'why are you doing nothing'?

[AzyWng]

overwhelming to go from 'hurry up and wait' to 'why are you doing nothing'?

Dictator-of-a-small-country-tactic: Always keep your opponents off balance.

[Tack]

Ghost Stories.

English dub.

It's basically an official Abridged Series.

Yeah just watched the youtube highlight reel thing too and... 'kay. I'm in.

[pisskop]

overwhelming to go from 'hurry up and wait' to 'why are you doing nothing'?

Dictator-of-a-small-country-tactic: Always keep your opponents off balance.

well when i see the man ill tell him that

until then im expecting to finish my degree at some point this decade

[Reelya]

Heh, there was some ad in London that has the twitterverse screaming blue murder, i thought it was going to be some ultra-sexist thing, but it's protein supplements for women. The woman in the add has a very dominant / self assured and fit-looking pose etc. It thought it was actually not that bad, it's exactly how you'd frame a man if you did a protein supplement ad for men.

http://www.news.com.au/finance/business/media/man-behind-controversial-are-you-beach-body-ready-posters-faces-fresh-backlash-with-think-small-ad/news-story/75d80dcf65ee5661c131d3b2f9b71215

Now, opponents are saying that it's "triggering" to fatties because it's for single shot protein drinks and the adline is "think small".

[AzyWng]

Gangstar New Orleans is Gameloft's latest foray into copying off of other people in a semi-successful manner. This game is online.

People have been typing in the chat ever since the game's release of what appear to be attempts at making commands.

It's fascinating really.

I guess all that time on Minecraft multiplayer servers made them take their spawn kits for granted.

[wierd]

You can never please the aggregate of that crowd.

Something will always be offensive to somebody.

Personally, I find their attempts at trying to force the world to not offend them, highly offensive, as absurdities like these manifest from it without fail.

[overseer05-15]

Gangstar New Orleans is Gameloft's latest foray into copying off of other people in a semi-successful manner. This game is online.

People have been typing in the chat ever since the game's release of what appear to be attempts at making commands.

It's fascinating really.

I guess all that time on Minecraft multiplayer servers made them take their spawn kits for granted.

/gamemode 1

/give @p 64 64

[Sergarr]

Well you can get into more of the language / predicate calculus style machine learning if you want, that area's far less crowded that the NN / deep learning field these days.

https://www.technologyreview.com/s/600984/an-ai-with-30-years-worth-of-knowledge-finally-goes-to-work/

While they benefit from being easily understandable, they're incapable of directly dealing with uncertainty and probability, being based in formal logic which doesn't work with those things. Also, I don't want to spent 31 years filling up a database. It's not much of a "machine learning" if it takes that much for it to start working.