4 ms·

I think that there are two problems here: one with physics and another with society. I'm somewhat familiar with academic world, and what she (and the letter) sa

I think that there are two problems here: one with physics and another with society. I'm somewhat familiar with academic world, and what she (and the letter) say about career scientists who optimize for formal metrics without any regard for any real scientific value strikes too close to home. They value complacency above else, original ideas and challengers to incumbents are driven away, and nobody really cares if studies replicate or data is massaged, whereas being even remotely ideologically impure kills your career instantly. I think society across the globe slowly starts to realize this state of affairs, and the backlash against science as a whole will be enormous. In the eyes of the taxpayers, there's not that much of a difference between particle physicists who have been spending billions of dollars on bigger and bigger colliders, and psychologists who popularized non-replicating studies based on a sample of 35 university students but refused to touch IQ (one of the most, if not replicated psychology concepts ever), or biologists who invented new species out of thin air based on the most minuscule differences between population just to stop a development project they oppose for ideological reasons. All of this will cause severe backlash. Baby will be thrown out with the bathwater, trust and funding for science as a whole will suffer for decades.

ericjmorey 2y ago
The current US Presidential administration is in the process of throwing the entire bathroom out, tub and all. We're going to have substantially less reliable data over the next decade.
- golergka 2y ago
  Thankfully, we have more than one country in the world, and we can compare outcomes when different countries pursue different strategies. Results may surprise. 2,5 years ago I, as the rest of HN, was sure that Twitter wouldn't be able to function in a few months after layoffs, but here we are.
  - davorak 2y ago
    I did not see many people betting real money on twitter not running, did you? You have have to filter out the momentary hype. > The current US Presidential administration is in the process of throwing the entire bathroom out, tub and all. Are they, maybe, I have not seen any popularized document detailing their plans and they are taking large steps that will have consequences. Since there is not well popularized plan uncertainty and doubt is filling that void, a consequence which is easy to anticipate(as are some consequences of uncertainty and doubt). > We're going to have substantially less reliable data over the next decade. With no well popularized plan, hard to tell, and even harder because there are people hard at work on their own vision of the future that do not 100% line up with the current administration's plans and those people will influence the next decade as well.
    - golergka 2y ago
      https://polymarket.com/event/will-twitter-report-any-outages-by-december-15-2022/will-twitter-report-any-outages-by-december-15-2022?tid=1739815074285 https://polymarket.com/event/will-twitter-report-any-outages...
  - bborud 2y ago
    Yes, here we are; I spend almost no time there now since every time I drop by all I see is political noise and culture wars. Most people I used to follow now either take part in the shit show or have lost interest in posting.
AlotOfReading 2y ago
There's one big difference to taxpayers: the psychologists and biologists don't cost billions of dollars. National funding agencies are fundamentally in the business of choosing "this not that" because of the constraints of finite funding. Just like with VC math, it's difficult to imagine the benefits of the billion dollar collider outweigh the opportunity cost of investing in a large nation's worth of researchers to explore smaller, cheaper ideas.
- golergka 2y ago
  That's too specific a message, with too much nuance, to try and get to the general public. When trust in science is going down, its going down as a whole.

ericjmorey 2y ago

The current US Presidential administration is in the process of throwing the entire bathroom out, tub and all. We're going to have substantially less reliable data over the next decade.

golergka 2y ago
Thankfully, we have more than one country in the world, and we can compare outcomes when different countries pursue different strategies. Results may surprise. 2,5 years ago I, as the rest of HN, was sure that Twitter wouldn't be able to function in a few months after layoffs, but here we are.
- davorak 2y ago
  I did not see many people betting real money on twitter not running, did you? You have have to filter out the momentary hype. > The current US Presidential administration is in the process of throwing the entire bathroom out, tub and all. Are they, maybe, I have not seen any popularized document detailing their plans and they are taking large steps that will have consequences. Since there is not well popularized plan uncertainty and doubt is filling that void, a consequence which is easy to anticipate(as are some consequences of uncertainty and doubt). > We're going to have substantially less reliable data over the next decade. With no well popularized plan, hard to tell, and even harder because there are people hard at work on their own vision of the future that do not 100% line up with the current administration's plans and those people will influence the next decade as well.
  - golergka 2y ago
    https://polymarket.com/event/will-twitter-report-any-outages-by-december-15-2022/will-twitter-report-any-outages-by-december-15-2022?tid=1739815074285 https://polymarket.com/event/will-twitter-report-any-outages...
- bborud 2y ago
  Yes, here we are; I spend almost no time there now since every time I drop by all I see is political noise and culture wars. Most people I used to follow now either take part in the shit show or have lost interest in posting.

AlotOfReading 2y ago

There's one big difference to taxpayers: the psychologists and biologists don't cost billions of dollars. National funding agencies are fundamentally in the business of choosing "this not that" because of the constraints of finite funding. Just like with VC math, it's difficult to imagine the benefits of the billion dollar collider outweigh the opportunity cost of investing in a large nation's worth of researchers to explore smaller, cheaper ideas.

golergka 2y ago
That's too specific a message, with too much nuance, to try and get to the general public. When trust in science is going down, its going down as a whole.