3 ms·

Why is this upvoted, is HN literally a slot machine? It's garbage. A 3 weeks, self evaluated survey for amazon vouchers for ~100 people? It's a great student

Why is this upvoted, is HN literally a slot machine? It's garbage. A 3 weeks, self evaluated survey for amazon vouchers for ~100 people? It's a great student thesis, but it's not science. The journal article reads like it's actually written to be confusing. Why do we think that's acceptable? What is the game here, people don't like supervisors so you write an article that make them look bad, so the media creates spam around you, they get clicks from the masses and you make money while everyone gets dumber. Out of interest does anyone have a link to the actual questionnaire used? So we can actually evaluate the claim.

db48x 6y ago
There is a large random component, and also a large popularity component.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
motoboi 6y ago
This seems to be part of the debate about Timnit Gebru exit from Google.
- aaron695 6y ago
  And Timnit Gebru would be the evil supervisor I assume? Timnit Gebru is a bad person, but this article is a strange segway. "Moral cleansing" is a made up term with no meaning for instance. It's used to confuse people, these industries have evolved similarly to how GPT-3 has evolved. You short circuit peoples brains so they can't evaluate what's being said.
  - SuoDuanDao 6y ago
    Well, 'moral cleansing' is really just jargon. Not an indicator of a healthy research environment, but I had no trouble googling it. My interpretation was that Timmit Gebru was the kind of person publishing papers like these.
cbhl 6y ago
It looks like the survey surveyed 100 supervisors; that would be more difficult to do independently than just surveying 100 rank-and-file employees. (The alternative would be to run this inside a FANG or similarly large company, and then try to get permission through the formal process to get a paper or book published.)
chmod775 6y ago
I was going to post pretty much this. Makes you wonder whether it's hidden behind a paywall for a reason. I'm sure those paywalls are also hiding a lot of actually decent science, but it appears that just as many rely on them to hide their sloppy research.

db48x 6y ago

There is a large random component, and also a large popularity component.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

motoboi 6y ago

This seems to be part of the debate about Timnit Gebru exit from Google.

aaron695 6y ago
And Timnit Gebru would be the evil supervisor I assume? Timnit Gebru is a bad person, but this article is a strange segway. "Moral cleansing" is a made up term with no meaning for instance. It's used to confuse people, these industries have evolved similarly to how GPT-3 has evolved. You short circuit peoples brains so they can't evaluate what's being said.
- SuoDuanDao 6y ago
  Well, 'moral cleansing' is really just jargon. Not an indicator of a healthy research environment, but I had no trouble googling it. My interpretation was that Timmit Gebru was the kind of person publishing papers like these.

cbhl 6y ago

It looks like the survey surveyed 100 supervisors; that would be more difficult to do independently than just surveying 100 rank-and-file employees. (The alternative would be to run this inside a FANG or similarly large company, and then try to get permission through the formal process to get a paper or book published.)

chmod775 6y ago

I was going to post pretty much this. Makes you wonder whether it's hidden behind a paywall for a reason. I'm sure those paywalls are also hiding a lot of actually decent science, but it appears that just as many rely on them to hide their sloppy research.