Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?
Polls on the front page of Slashdot? Is the world coming to an end?! Nope; read more about it. ×

Comment: Re:America next? (Score 2) 259

by aaaaaaargh! (#49825791) Attached to: Professional Russian Trolling Exposed

I surf too much on the web ;-) and from this perspective must say that I highly doubt that there are organized US trolls. Or at least, if there are some, then they are much harder to recognize. Russian trolls are easy to spot, they come in troves and swamp news media forums. They don't have to be sneaky, because the 1x1 of political propaganda is to simply repeat a complete falsehood over and over. Works all the time.

Comment: Re:Science is fine... Academic institutions are no (Score 1) 420

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) 420

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) 156

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) 208

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.

Those who claim the dead never return to life haven't ever been around here at quitting time.