4 ms·

> Does no one else get sick of this? I roll my eyes every time I see such stories and look for a more technical coverage of the topic somewhere else. I suspec

> Does no one else get sick of this? I roll my eyes every time I see such stories and look for a more technical coverage of the topic somewhere else. I suspect that's a difference between thing- vs. people-oriented readers. I assume the former are in the minority.

jessriedel 8y ago
It's not so much that I'm oriented toward things as that I just hate people...
- thraway180306 8y ago
  I just hate people Wow, that's rich. After some decades I discovered that physics too is about people. Social aspect is inescapable. That didn't turn me off, but taught to appreciate the narrative aspect as integral and thus maybe a part of the beauty. Not necessarily in the watered down journalism (which is fine, as a scientist I'm not the target audience) but the fact that the big narratives that harnessed collective resources previously were just that: big narratives. That was one of the functions and enablers of the Space Program itself, not sustained nor repeated since, to the determent of our capability. And that's what bystanders look for in science. (Not just them, if your social status and self-esteem hinges on you being a scientist, that's also taking part in narrative that enables you to thrive despite hating people). If you really just hate people, then take example in Teller - he also knew the power of storytelling but just used it mercilessly.
  - jessriedel 8y ago
    Easy there, Hoss. The ellipsis was intended to mark my comment as a joke.
    - thraway180306 8y ago
      I made the joke on you.
golergka 8y ago
I don't know. I'm a pretty extroverted guy, love communicating with people and performing live in front of an audience, with a lot of social connections - and yet, when I want to read about rocket technology, I'd rather read about the technology, with detailed illustrations of dissected engines and graphs and all the interesting details, rather than read yet another description of a yet another postdoc's day in the lab.
- 52-6F-62 8y ago
  > I'd rather read about the technology, with detailed illustrations of dissected engines and graphs and all the interesting details, rather than read yet another description of a yet another postdoc's day in the lab. I personally like both, but I wouldn't go seeking hard tech and science from Bloomberg Businessweek. It's a good publication, but hard, detailed science is not it's MO, and never was. It's like a series of pointers to hard science subjects (if that happens to be among the subjects) for business minds and investors. It covers politics as well, but it's stated purpose is how these matters reflect on the business world, not overly concerned with details of policy unless they affect the subject of business. Occasionally they have more hard-hitting pieces, but for the most part, that's what it is. I think that's a good thing. The many people decrying "watered down journalism" and that there are too few technical details here, are really missing the forest for the trees.
  - golergka 8y ago
    I'd love to read on the busines side of these things, too - anything but the personal stories, please.
TeMPOraL 8y ago
> I suspect that's a difference between thing- vs. people-oriented readers. I assume the former are in the minority. Might be also because you know that most of the "people-oriented" content in such articles is bullshit, misrepresented to create story progression? That it has negative educational value? Are people who like such articles aware of this?

jessriedel 8y ago

It's not so much that I'm oriented toward things as that I just hate people...

thraway180306 8y ago
I just hate people Wow, that's rich. After some decades I discovered that physics too is about people. Social aspect is inescapable. That didn't turn me off, but taught to appreciate the narrative aspect as integral and thus maybe a part of the beauty. Not necessarily in the watered down journalism (which is fine, as a scientist I'm not the target audience) but the fact that the big narratives that harnessed collective resources previously were just that: big narratives. That was one of the functions and enablers of the Space Program itself, not sustained nor repeated since, to the determent of our capability. And that's what bystanders look for in science. (Not just them, if your social status and self-esteem hinges on you being a scientist, that's also taking part in narrative that enables you to thrive despite hating people). If you really just hate people, then take example in Teller - he also knew the power of storytelling but just used it mercilessly.
- jessriedel 8y ago
  Easy there, Hoss. The ellipsis was intended to mark my comment as a joke.
  - thraway180306 8y ago
    I made the joke on you.

golergka 8y ago

I don't know. I'm a pretty extroverted guy, love communicating with people and performing live in front of an audience, with a lot of social connections - and yet, when I want to read about rocket technology, I'd rather read about the technology, with detailed illustrations of dissected engines and graphs and all the interesting details, rather than read yet another description of a yet another postdoc's day in the lab.

52-6F-62 8y ago
> I'd rather read about the technology, with detailed illustrations of dissected engines and graphs and all the interesting details, rather than read yet another description of a yet another postdoc's day in the lab. I personally like both, but I wouldn't go seeking hard tech and science from Bloomberg Businessweek. It's a good publication, but hard, detailed science is not it's MO, and never was. It's like a series of pointers to hard science subjects (if that happens to be among the subjects) for business minds and investors. It covers politics as well, but it's stated purpose is how these matters reflect on the business world, not overly concerned with details of policy unless they affect the subject of business. Occasionally they have more hard-hitting pieces, but for the most part, that's what it is. I think that's a good thing. The many people decrying "watered down journalism" and that there are too few technical details here, are really missing the forest for the trees.
- golergka 8y ago
  I'd love to read on the busines side of these things, too - anything but the personal stories, please.

TeMPOraL 8y ago

> I suspect that's a difference between thing- vs. people-oriented readers. I assume the former are in the minority. Might be also because you know that most of the "people-oriented" content in such articles is bullshit, misrepresented to create story progression? That it has negative educational value? Are people who like such articles aware of this?