5 ms·

i kinda think we should blame the youtube alg for this, the algs set incentives which shape behavior at scale, and it’s not like one can make a living doing act

i kinda think we should blame the youtube alg for this, the algs set incentives which shape behavior at scale, and it’s not like one can make a living doing actual physics these days

shermantanktop 1y ago
By default, people have moral agency for what they do. Exceptions exist, of course, but “I wanted to make more money” is not one of them.
- m_fayer 1y ago
  Actually, taking someone’s livelihood hostage is a great and time-proven way to rob initially decent people of their moral agency. The case studies are everywhere.
  - chatmasta 1y ago
    One could make a compelling philosophical argument that the core purpose of money is to separate individuals from their moral agency.
  - shermantanktop 1y ago
    Do they lose moral agency? Having practical reasons to take an action is not the same as ceding moral agency. We are not perfect creatures and sometimes do immoral things, for various reasons. But we did those things, nobody else did them. That also suggests a practical guideline: whatever your rationale for taking action, anticipate living with that rationale for years and years. If you can’t see it looking the same 10 years from now, perhaps that is a strong clue.
    - m_fayer 1y ago
      Talk to me about agency when it’s the wellbeing of your vulnerable dependent loved ones, young or old or sick, that’s on the line.
- PaulHoule 1y ago
  When it comes to physics it is even weirder than this. I’d argue there really isn’t anything at stake anymore. Einstein was able to make predictions and get them verified. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eddington_experiment https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eddington_experiment But the Higgs Boson might be the last prediction in fundamental physics to be verified in the lifetime of the predictor. Neutrino oscillations sure weren’t. Society needs people to teach introductory physics classes to a wide range of undergrad students and upper level classes to a few specialists and that is what determines the size of the job market. You don’t really need physics PhDs to do that (I did a lot of that work in the first two years of my PhD program) The physics community manages to organize things such that a few people can work on fundamental physics on the side but their numbers are basically determined by demand for teaching with is unrelated to the situation in research. One strange thing though is that there is some market for books for laymen like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Brief_History_of_Time https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Brief_History_of_Time and it’s been clear for a while those people aren’t really satisfied. They think Bell’s inequality and ‘interpretations of quantum mechanics’ are more interesting than physicists do, there is no more Babe Ruth style showmanship [1] and from an outsider’s point of view there’s a feeling that since GUTs and inflation and String theory there are just a lot of bad smells —- insiders are right to discount some of these complaints but in a lot of ways inflation and string theory have neither had a story that completely made sense nor anything that rules them out so they lumber on in an unsatisfying way so in the 2000s we started to see insider-outsider figures like Peter Woit (who I strongly endorse) and Hossenfelder (who’s been too corrupted by being a YouTube star) [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Babe_Ruth%27s_called_shot https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Babe_Ruth%27s_called_shot
dpc050505 1y ago
I have two friends who are in trade school after studying physics. They're applying physics everyday. They'll make a perfectly adequate living in a few months and meanwhile they're both getting paid to go to school.
layer8 1y ago
I submit Sean Carroll, and his podcast, for contrast.
- nobody9999 1y ago
  I'd add PBS Space Time (Matt O'Dowd), Becky Smethurst and, to a lesser extent (more because she has a much broader remit that doesn't always focus on science -- that said, it's always insightful) Angela Collier.

i kinda think we should blame the youtube alg for this, the algs set incentives which shape behavior at scale, and it’s not like one can make a living doing actual physics these days

shermantanktop 1y ago

By default, people have moral agency for what they do. Exceptions exist, of course, but “I wanted to make more money” is not one of them.

m_fayer 1y ago
Actually, taking someone’s livelihood hostage is a great and time-proven way to rob initially decent people of their moral agency. The case studies are everywhere.
- chatmasta 1y ago
  One could make a compelling philosophical argument that the core purpose of money is to separate individuals from their moral agency.
- shermantanktop 1y ago
  Do they lose moral agency? Having practical reasons to take an action is not the same as ceding moral agency. We are not perfect creatures and sometimes do immoral things, for various reasons. But we did those things, nobody else did them. That also suggests a practical guideline: whatever your rationale for taking action, anticipate living with that rationale for years and years. If you can’t see it looking the same 10 years from now, perhaps that is a strong clue.
  - m_fayer 1y ago
    Talk to me about agency when it’s the wellbeing of your vulnerable dependent loved ones, young or old or sick, that’s on the line.
PaulHoule 1y ago
When it comes to physics it is even weirder than this. I’d argue there really isn’t anything at stake anymore. Einstein was able to make predictions and get them verified. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eddington_experiment https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eddington_experiment But the Higgs Boson might be the last prediction in fundamental physics to be verified in the lifetime of the predictor. Neutrino oscillations sure weren’t. Society needs people to teach introductory physics classes to a wide range of undergrad students and upper level classes to a few specialists and that is what determines the size of the job market. You don’t really need physics PhDs to do that (I did a lot of that work in the first two years of my PhD program) The physics community manages to organize things such that a few people can work on fundamental physics on the side but their numbers are basically determined by demand for teaching with is unrelated to the situation in research. One strange thing though is that there is some market for books for laymen like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Brief_History_of_Time https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Brief_History_of_Time and it’s been clear for a while those people aren’t really satisfied. They think Bell’s inequality and ‘interpretations of quantum mechanics’ are more interesting than physicists do, there is no more Babe Ruth style showmanship [1] and from an outsider’s point of view there’s a feeling that since GUTs and inflation and String theory there are just a lot of bad smells —- insiders are right to discount some of these complaints but in a lot of ways inflation and string theory have neither had a story that completely made sense nor anything that rules them out so they lumber on in an unsatisfying way so in the 2000s we started to see insider-outsider figures like Peter Woit (who I strongly endorse) and Hossenfelder (who’s been too corrupted by being a YouTube star) [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Babe_Ruth%27s_called_shot https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Babe_Ruth%27s_called_shot

dpc050505 1y ago

I have two friends who are in trade school after studying physics. They're applying physics everyday. They'll make a perfectly adequate living in a few months and meanwhile they're both getting paid to go to school.

layer8 1y ago

I submit Sean Carroll, and his podcast, for contrast.

nobody9999 1y ago
I'd add PBS Space Time (Matt O'Dowd), Becky Smethurst and, to a lesser extent (more because she has a much broader remit that doesn't always focus on science -- that said, it's always insightful) Angela Collier.