4 ms·

This is not surprising and will continue to get worse. The Chinese pump out far more scientists than us, and the small amount of the ones we have in comparison

This is not surprising and will continue to get worse. The Chinese pump out far more scientists than us, and the small amount of the ones we have in comparison are handicapped by thought policing in the new age of political correctness. Not to mention how you need to publish papers that appease to certain powers that be to get any funding for anything. We pay teachers like shit, and there are no incentives for more teachers to be created. Colleges are way too expensive, discriminating against Asian's for example, and are now removing merit-based testing. Our obsession with diversity and forced equality of outcomes. I could go on. We're pretty screwed.

lern_too_spel 5y ago
It's surreal that the "I'm being censored" hysteria among the privileged class has caused people to sincerely believe that there is more thought policing in the US than in China.
- zthrowaway 5y ago
  This wasn't clear from my rambling above, but I don't think we are thought policed more than people in China, not at all. They are certainly limited in what they can do in other ways. But us having to appease to mobs or change scientific findings to not upset some subset of emotional people on Twitter is not progress, it's yet another cut in a death by a thousand cuts spiral we are in right now as a country. It would be nice to not have that added to the pile.
  - lern_too_spel 5y ago
    Twitter is not a platform for science. If you believe useful scientific findings are being hindered by what people are writing in 280 character missives, I have a hard time believing you understand how science happens. What matters is funding, and what drives funding is the government, which has largely military objectives, and industry, which has largely profit objectives. Nobody gets research funding from Twitter.
    - throwaway8582 5y ago
      This is a very poor attempt at a strawman, nobody thinks that Twitter is where scientific research is funded or conducted. Its role in the process is that of the stick, not the carrot. When people, including scientists, make statements or publish results that challenge certain political narratives, users on Twitter will harass, boycott and/or dox that person, their family, and their employer, leading to a climate of fear and the inability to have open and honest discussion on a number of topics.
      - lern_too_spel 5y ago
        This is a gross misunderstanding of my comment. Once more, do you believe that Twitter is hindering actual useful scientific findings? Of course not. The people who are funding useful research demand that the results be accurate. They are paying for it. Governments can save a lot of money if it turns out climate change has no anthropogenic cause. On the other hand, if it does have an anthropogenic cause, they can save a lot of money if they understand that and take action. It doesn't matter what the Twitter mobs say.
        muh_gradle 5y ago
        I have no idea why you're so fixated on Twitter. The people you're responding to are obviously saying that K-12 education, college admissions, and as a result, science is being politicized.
        lern_too_spel 5y ago
        The people I am responding to are fixated on Twitter. If you want to change the subject, I'm happy to oblige. K-12 education is being politicized in as far as believing climate science was politicized. If you think that college admissions are being politicized, you must have no idea how graduate school admissions work. It has not changed in decades. Whether changes to undergraduate admissions has an effect on scientific output is a statement that requires evidence. Until I see evidence, I consider the alternate hypothesis that increasing admission rates in communities that have few college graduates could decrease crime and increase general academic achievement and scientific progress to be just as likely.
- HKH2 5y ago
  In China, there is more thought policing when it comes to anything related to criticizing the government or authority. Concerning social matters, people are far more likely to get bored than angry.

lern_too_spel 5y ago

It's surreal that the "I'm being censored" hysteria among the privileged class has caused people to sincerely believe that there is more thought policing in the US than in China.

zthrowaway 5y ago
This wasn't clear from my rambling above, but I don't think we are thought policed more than people in China, not at all. They are certainly limited in what they can do in other ways. But us having to appease to mobs or change scientific findings to not upset some subset of emotional people on Twitter is not progress, it's yet another cut in a death by a thousand cuts spiral we are in right now as a country. It would be nice to not have that added to the pile.
- lern_too_spel 5y ago
  Twitter is not a platform for science. If you believe useful scientific findings are being hindered by what people are writing in 280 character missives, I have a hard time believing you understand how science happens. What matters is funding, and what drives funding is the government, which has largely military objectives, and industry, which has largely profit objectives. Nobody gets research funding from Twitter.
  - throwaway8582 5y ago
    This is a very poor attempt at a strawman, nobody thinks that Twitter is where scientific research is funded or conducted. Its role in the process is that of the stick, not the carrot. When people, including scientists, make statements or publish results that challenge certain political narratives, users on Twitter will harass, boycott and/or dox that person, their family, and their employer, leading to a climate of fear and the inability to have open and honest discussion on a number of topics.
    - lern_too_spel 5y ago
      This is a gross misunderstanding of my comment. Once more, do you believe that Twitter is hindering actual useful scientific findings? Of course not. The people who are funding useful research demand that the results be accurate. They are paying for it. Governments can save a lot of money if it turns out climate change has no anthropogenic cause. On the other hand, if it does have an anthropogenic cause, they can save a lot of money if they understand that and take action. It doesn't matter what the Twitter mobs say.
      - muh_gradle 5y ago
        I have no idea why you're so fixated on Twitter. The people you're responding to are obviously saying that K-12 education, college admissions, and as a result, science is being politicized.
        lern_too_spel 5y ago
        The people I am responding to are fixated on Twitter. If you want to change the subject, I'm happy to oblige. K-12 education is being politicized in as far as believing climate science was politicized. If you think that college admissions are being politicized, you must have no idea how graduate school admissions work. It has not changed in decades. Whether changes to undergraduate admissions has an effect on scientific output is a statement that requires evidence. Until I see evidence, I consider the alternate hypothesis that increasing admission rates in communities that have few college graduates could decrease crime and increase general academic achievement and scientific progress to be just as likely.
HKH2 5y ago
In China, there is more thought policing when it comes to anything related to criticizing the government or authority. Concerning social matters, people are far more likely to get bored than angry.