4 ms·

I have some coworkers who use AI in place of the bullets in bulleted lists and I don't hate it. It's fun and eye-catching and brings some novelty to our scient

I have some coworkers who use AI in place of the bullets in bulleted lists and I don't hate it. It's fun and eye-catching and brings some novelty to our scientific work. One uses science themed emojis (he's a cardiologist so lots of cardiac hearts, test tubes and DNA emojis) and another uses custom-mojis that she designed after Piet Mondrian's art. I've also seen emojis popping up in official meeting minutes which is fine too. Why not spice it up with some whimsy.

freehorse 10mo ago
> brings some novelty to our scientific work Is this satire? I hope it is. Otherwise it seems like a sorry state that science currently is if it needs emojis to bring some novelty into it.
- randycupertino 10mo ago
  Heh, I didn't intend it to be satire. When you spend 7 hours a day cleaning data, sending queries to research sites and doing patient profile review emojis spice it up and can be eye-catching and fun. Why not? I generally don't use them in routine practice but when I see some of my straight-laced coworkers strategically deploy them I don't hate it!
- goodmythical 10mo ago
  Jesus, my dude, lighten up a bit. Consider this: You're a grad student who's been reading page after page after page after page after page after page after page after page after page after page of lack and white text. How is marking a particularly explosive comment with a graphic representation of an explosion any different from highlighting it? Or from Davinci's marginal scribbles? or from Feynman's wave diagrams? Or, for that matter, simply bolding, italicizing, or underlining it? Shit, why even format it at all? Who needs page breaks and indented paragraphs in something as serious as a scientific paper? God forbid we ever go so far as to implement more than one font. Changes to the methods by which we communicate are made on a regular basis. If people find them useful enough to put them in their own communications, and they do not harm the clarity of the transmission, who are we (or you in particular) to cry about it on the sidelines? You remind me of the person in the back of the room trying to invalidate a proof based on a misspelling that in no way impacts the validity of the proof. As if adding an emoji somehow invalidates the months or years of work that went in to producing the content that you are consuming at no cost and will likely benefit from without having contributed to the project in any meaningful way. I mean, seriously. Imagine someone's finally created a genuine cure for all cancers. They've spent the entire lives of hundreds of people and billions of dollars, and oh no! What's this? Aww, damn there's an emoji in one of the graphs. Damn. Too bad, I guess it's not going to be good enough for freehorse. Better go ahead and send it back for revisions. Can't publish it like that. Not now, not ever. Curing cancer's going to have to wait until we can force the author of this paper to conform to our arbitrary preferences.
  - thwarted 10mo ago
    > You're a grad student who's been reading page after page after page after page after page after page after page after page after page after page of lack and white text. What an interesting way to describe reading a book. It's amazing that anyone can read an entire book, composed of hundreds of pages, without getting bored of the black text.
    - wormius 10mo ago
      The rise in illiteracy rates is really fucking disturbing and this attitude (the parent) is part of what's to blame. Looking at the examples in the comment above, I really hope it's not that bad. It's like the stupid "ROFL"/CLOWN by political fighters, and the (handclap) 500 times in a row, like. Or the ROFL by people who are trying to make their shit seem "funnier" than it every could be and only makes it more obnoxious. There's a difference between "making a powerpoint at a conference and using emojis as bullet points" and throwing emojis every other word to be cute and getting papers published, or medical records with that.
- b00ty4breakfast 10mo ago
  NO FUN IN MY SCIENCE ONLY SERIOUS BUSINESS LIKE GOD INTENDED
  - OJFord 10mo ago
    Novelty doesn't mean fun, it could have been a joke because the work of scientific research is literally finding novelty, that which is new, pushing boundaries of knowledge, etc.
    - b00ty4breakfast 10mo ago
      Novelty can increase enjoyment which can imply that the activity is "fun" (though not all enjoyable activities can be categorized as "fun"). However, using the context clues, I surmised that the original poster, that is the one who enjoys seeing emojis being used as bullet points in literature produced by his colleague, finds this to be "fun". Is that pedantic enough? AM I GOOD ENOUGH???? WILL YOU LOVE ME NOW DADDY?
- DavidPiper 10mo ago
  You're being downvoted, but I tend to agree that communication is not the part of science you want to "innovate" on. The purpose of (scientific) communication is to be understood, not to be novel. The science you're writing about is hopefully extremely novel of course. In general I've found "innovating on the wrong thing" is surprisingly common, especially from people who are bored and/or hungry for promotions, etc.
  - randycupertino 10mo ago
    They're not putting emojis in peer review papers in Science and Nature or poster presentations at ASCO; they're putting them in emails, teams chats and meeting minutes. Believe it or not researchers enjoy humor around sometimes. There's a global shortage of a specific DAKO antibody we need for biopsy analysis right now and on a call with 50 people one of our chief scientists deadpans, "it's because I stopped making it in my basement."
    - DavidPiper 10mo ago
      I do believe it, and am glad for it. The paper indicates clinical notes and patient communications, though, not internal messages. Which means I've been talking past you the whole time anyway, my bad.
flexagoon 10mo ago
> use AI in place of the bullets Did you mean "use emojis"?
- NewJazz 10mo ago
  Or maybe the robot face emoji?
- randycupertino 10mo ago
  Yes! :)
deleted 10mo ago
[deleted]
whatshisface 10mo ago
>Why not spice it up with some whimsy. These leaked documents (pastebin below) might present evidence for a different view. https://paste-bin.org/0bu8f8igkd https://paste-bin.org/0bu8f8igkd
- tempodox 10mo ago
  That twin tower emoji with a plane rushing into it betrays a sense of humor.
- deleted 10mo ago
  [deleted]
- randycupertino 10mo ago
  Lol yeah those examples are clearly over the top, unhinged egregious bad taste emoji use! But I think strategically deployed occasionally used with some discernment they are fine. :shrug: I had examples in this comment of how I see people using them at work but hackernews apparently doesn't allow emojis!
delusional 10mo ago
> It's fun and eye-catching and brings some novelty to our scientific work. That's not what "novelty" means in that context. If your review included "these emoji's really bring some novelty to this cholesterol survey" I'd look at you funny.
TwoNineFive 10mo ago
This is abusive toxic positivity, no different than "it's just a joke bro."
- hackable_sand 10mo ago
  It's not
- idiotsecant 9mo ago
  You have a terminal case of taking yourself too seriously, I'm afraid. 0-80 years, tops.

freehorse 10mo ago

> brings some novelty to our scientific work Is this satire? I hope it is. Otherwise it seems like a sorry state that science currently is if it needs emojis to bring some novelty into it.

randycupertino 10mo ago
Heh, I didn't intend it to be satire. When you spend 7 hours a day cleaning data, sending queries to research sites and doing patient profile review emojis spice it up and can be eye-catching and fun. Why not? I generally don't use them in routine practice but when I see some of my straight-laced coworkers strategically deploy them I don't hate it!
goodmythical 10mo ago
Jesus, my dude, lighten up a bit. Consider this: You're a grad student who's been reading page after page after page after page after page after page after page after page after page after page of lack and white text. How is marking a particularly explosive comment with a graphic representation of an explosion any different from highlighting it? Or from Davinci's marginal scribbles? or from Feynman's wave diagrams? Or, for that matter, simply bolding, italicizing, or underlining it? Shit, why even format it at all? Who needs page breaks and indented paragraphs in something as serious as a scientific paper? God forbid we ever go so far as to implement more than one font. Changes to the methods by which we communicate are made on a regular basis. If people find them useful enough to put them in their own communications, and they do not harm the clarity of the transmission, who are we (or you in particular) to cry about it on the sidelines? You remind me of the person in the back of the room trying to invalidate a proof based on a misspelling that in no way impacts the validity of the proof. As if adding an emoji somehow invalidates the months or years of work that went in to producing the content that you are consuming at no cost and will likely benefit from without having contributed to the project in any meaningful way. I mean, seriously. Imagine someone's finally created a genuine cure for all cancers. They've spent the entire lives of hundreds of people and billions of dollars, and oh no! What's this? Aww, damn there's an emoji in one of the graphs. Damn. Too bad, I guess it's not going to be good enough for freehorse. Better go ahead and send it back for revisions. Can't publish it like that. Not now, not ever. Curing cancer's going to have to wait until we can force the author of this paper to conform to our arbitrary preferences.
- thwarted 10mo ago
  > You're a grad student who's been reading page after page after page after page after page after page after page after page after page after page of lack and white text. What an interesting way to describe reading a book. It's amazing that anyone can read an entire book, composed of hundreds of pages, without getting bored of the black text.
  - wormius 10mo ago
    The rise in illiteracy rates is really fucking disturbing and this attitude (the parent) is part of what's to blame. Looking at the examples in the comment above, I really hope it's not that bad. It's like the stupid "ROFL"/CLOWN by political fighters, and the (handclap) 500 times in a row, like. Or the ROFL by people who are trying to make their shit seem "funnier" than it every could be and only makes it more obnoxious. There's a difference between "making a powerpoint at a conference and using emojis as bullet points" and throwing emojis every other word to be cute and getting papers published, or medical records with that.
b00ty4breakfast 10mo ago
NO FUN IN MY SCIENCE ONLY SERIOUS BUSINESS LIKE GOD INTENDED
- OJFord 10mo ago
  Novelty doesn't mean fun, it could have been a joke because the work of scientific research is literally finding novelty, that which is new, pushing boundaries of knowledge, etc.
  - b00ty4breakfast 10mo ago
    Novelty can increase enjoyment which can imply that the activity is "fun" (though not all enjoyable activities can be categorized as "fun"). However, using the context clues, I surmised that the original poster, that is the one who enjoys seeing emojis being used as bullet points in literature produced by his colleague, finds this to be "fun". Is that pedantic enough? AM I GOOD ENOUGH???? WILL YOU LOVE ME NOW DADDY?
DavidPiper 10mo ago
You're being downvoted, but I tend to agree that communication is not the part of science you want to "innovate" on. The purpose of (scientific) communication is to be understood, not to be novel. The science you're writing about is hopefully extremely novel of course. In general I've found "innovating on the wrong thing" is surprisingly common, especially from people who are bored and/or hungry for promotions, etc.
- randycupertino 10mo ago
  They're not putting emojis in peer review papers in Science and Nature or poster presentations at ASCO; they're putting them in emails, teams chats and meeting minutes. Believe it or not researchers enjoy humor around sometimes. There's a global shortage of a specific DAKO antibody we need for biopsy analysis right now and on a call with 50 people one of our chief scientists deadpans, "it's because I stopped making it in my basement."
  - DavidPiper 10mo ago
    I do believe it, and am glad for it. The paper indicates clinical notes and patient communications, though, not internal messages. Which means I've been talking past you the whole time anyway, my bad.

flexagoon 10mo ago

> use AI in place of the bullets Did you mean "use emojis"?

NewJazz 10mo ago
Or maybe the robot face emoji?
randycupertino 10mo ago
Yes! :)

deleted 10mo ago

[deleted]

whatshisface 10mo ago

>Why not spice it up with some whimsy. These leaked documents (pastebin below) might present evidence for a different view. https://paste-bin.org/0bu8f8igkd https://paste-bin.org/0bu8f8igkd

tempodox 10mo ago
That twin tower emoji with a plane rushing into it betrays a sense of humor.
deleted 10mo ago
[deleted]
randycupertino 10mo ago
Lol yeah those examples are clearly over the top, unhinged egregious bad taste emoji use! But I think strategically deployed occasionally used with some discernment they are fine. :shrug: I had examples in this comment of how I see people using them at work but hackernews apparently doesn't allow emojis!

delusional 10mo ago

> It's fun and eye-catching and brings some novelty to our scientific work. That's not what "novelty" means in that context. If your review included "these emoji's really bring some novelty to this cholesterol survey" I'd look at you funny.

TwoNineFive 10mo ago

This is abusive toxic positivity, no different than "it's just a joke bro."

hackable_sand 10mo ago
It's not
idiotsecant 9mo ago
You have a terminal case of taking yourself too seriously, I'm afraid. 0-80 years, tops.