Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Science is fine... Academic institutions are no (Score 1) 399

by aaaaaaargh! (#49780651) Attached to: Can Bad Scientific Practice Be Fixed?

Com on, I'm doing research in belief revision theory, epistemic logic and social choice. Not every science is empirical. Surely there's a lot of crap in the human sciences, but there is also some good and serious science. Admittedly, much of the better research could be considered applied mathematics but, then again, the same could also be said about many fields in the natural sciences.

Comment: Re:Science is fine... Academic institutions are no (Score 3, Interesting) 399

by aaaaaaargh! (#49776375) Attached to: Can Bad Scientific Practice Be Fixed?

Right, I'm in the humanities and there is this running joke that you only need to publish one really bad and obviously flawed paper on a really popular topic, and your career is certain. It's true, one bad paper, a followup book that is even worse published at 'prestigious' publisher like Oxford UP*, and you will get cited everywhere and get full tenure within about 3 years after the book has been published. I swear I'm not kidding, I've seen this more than once.

So much for impact scores and citation indices ...

-----
* I mention this publisher because he's well respected and nevertheless publishes many bad or at least dubious books without a proper peer review. I should know, because they once contacted me, a lowly postdoc from an unknown university, to review the latest book project by one of the most famous researchers in my area. It's obvious that they just googled me, as I'm easier to find on the net than some of my more established colleagues.

Comment: Re:How is this tech related? (Score 1) 155

by aaaaaaargh! (#49769435) Attached to: EU Drops Plans For Safer Pesticides After Pressure From US

Environmental regulations should be based on a deliberative scientific process, not on which interest group can shout the loudest.

Uhm, if that was the case, nobody would complain. There is a reason why most of TTIP is being drafted behind closed doors.

Also, ISDSes are unacceptable.

Comment: Re:It's an accidentally-on-purpose. (Score 1) 206

by aaaaaaargh! (#49734423) Attached to: Australian Law Could Criminalize the Teaching of Encryption

The key problem is that politicians rarely want to take the responsibility for abolishing a law, unless it is from 1900 and concerns lending vacuum cleaners to your neighbour in Colorado, whereas being a sharp 'law and order guy' often helps in getting more voters (mostly thanks to hysteric mass media). Hence, the laws accumulate and are getting broader and broader.

Comment: Re:Irresponsible of who?? (Score 1) 120

Who cares? People died and everything should be done to prevent a similar accident in the future.

Oh, man, I'm glad you're here to tell us how policy making and risk assessment works. Let's just ground all flights of all planes forever. The least we can do is everything.

Comment: Re:The downside of owning the internet (Score 1) 57

It is obviously not the right way, at least not to people who know how the Internet works. That's what this whole discussion is about.

The right way to deal with objectionable content is to take down the content from the server on which it is stored. Not from search engines. (There are fully distributed search engines, wonder how this nonsensical EU rule works with them.)

Air is water with holes in it.

Working...